Timeline of disability rights outside the United States

This disability rights timeline lists events outside the United States relating to the civil rights of people with disabilities, including court decisions, the passage of legislation, activists' actions, and the founding of various organizations. Although the disability rights movement itself began in the 1960s, advocacy for the rights of people with disabilities started much earlier and continues to the present.

Prior to the 1700s

• 1324 - The idea of insanity in English law dates from 1324, when the Statute de Praerogativa Regis allowed the King to take the lands of idiots and lunatics.

1700s

• 1714 - In English law, the Vagrancy Act 1714 allowed two Justices of the Peace to confine a dangerous lunatic.
• 1774 - The Madhouses Act 1774 (14 Geo. 3 c.49) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain, which set out a legal framework for regulating "madhouses" (insane asylums). It was repealed by the Madhouses Act 1828.

1800s

• 1800 - The Criminal Lunatics Act 1800 (39 & 40 Geo 3 c 94) was an Act of the Parliament of Great Britain that required and established a set procedure for the indefinite detention of mentally ill offenders. It was passed through the House of Commons in direct reaction to the trial of James Hadfield, who attempted to assassinate King George III.^[1]
• 1808 - The County Asylums Act 1808 formed mental health law in England and Wales from 1808 to 1845. Notably, the Asylums Act established public mental asylums in Britain.^[2] The Act is also known as Mr. Wynn's Act, after Charles Watkin Williams-Wynn, member of parliament for Montgomeryshire, who promoted the act.^[3]
• 1811 - The Marriage of Lunatics Act, 1811 of Ireland declared that any marriage entered into by a certified lunatic was void.^[4] This law was repealed by the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013.^[5]
• 1815 - The 1815 Act to Regulate Madhouses in Scotland (55 Geo. III c. 69) made provision for patients paying money to be held in institutions that were run for a profit by private individuals.^[6]
• 1815 - The Criminal Lunatics Amendment Act was enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom as "An Act for the Safe Custody of Insane Persons Charged with Offenses".^[7]
• 1817 - The Irish Lunatic Asylums for the Poor Act made legislative provisions of public asylums for all of Ireland.^[8]
• 1819 - The Pauper Lunatics Act 1819 was enacted, "for making provision for the better care of pauper lunatics in England".
• 1828 - The County Asylums Act 1828 was enacted in England as "An Act to amend the Laws for the Erection and Regulation of County Lunatic Asylums. And more effectually to provide for the care and maintenance of Pauper and Criminal Lunatics in England".^[9][7]
• 1828 - The Madhouses Act 1828 was enacted in England, and it reconstituted the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy and declared there should be fifteen of them, with five of those being physicians.^[9][10] It also repealed the Madhouses Act 1774.
• 1828 - The Chancery Lunatics Property Act was enacted as "An Act for extending the Acts passed in the forty-third and fifty- ninth years of the reign of his late majesty King George the third, for the sale of mortgages of estates of persons found lunatics by inquisition taken in England and Ireland, so as to authorise such sale and mortgage for some purposes; and for rendering Inquisitions on Commissions of Lunacy taken in England available in Ireland, and like Inquisitions taken in Ireland available in England." ^[7]
• 1832 - The 1832 Madhouses Act was enacted by the Parliament of the United Kingdom.^[7]
• 1840s - The M'Naghten rule (pronounced, and sometimes spelled, "McNaughton") is any variant of the 1840s jury instruction in a criminal case when there is a defense of insanity:

"that every man is to be presumed to be sane, and... that to establish a defense on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the time of the committing of the act, the party accused was laboring under such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the nature and quality of the act he was doing; or if he did know it, that he did not know he was doing what was wrong."^[11]:632 The rules so formulated as M'Naghten's Case 1843 10 C & F 200^[12] have been a standard test for criminal liability in relation to mentally disordered defendants in common law jurisdictions ever since, with some minor adjustments. When the tests set out by the Rules are satisfied, the accused may be adjudged "not guilty by reason of insanity" or "guilty but insane" and the sentence may be a mandatory or discretionary (but usually indeterminate) period of treatment in a secure hospital facility, or otherwise at the discretion of the court (depending on the country and the offence charged) instead of a punitive disposal. The insanity defence is recognized in Australia, Canada, England and Wales, Hong Kong, India, the Republic of Ireland, New Zealand, and Norway (as well as most U.S. states with the exception of Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Utah, and Vermont^[13]) but not all of these jurisdictions still use the M'Naghten Rules.

• 1845 - The Lunacy Act 1845 (8 & 9 Vict., c. 100) and the County Asylums Act 1845 formed mental health law in England and Wales from 1845 to 1890. The Lunacy Act's most important provision was a change in the status of mentally ill people to patients. As well, the Lunacy Act created the Commissioners in Lunacy or Lunacy Commission, a UK public body established to oversee asylums and the welfare of mentally ill people. It succeeded the Metropolitan Commissioners in Lunacy. The Lunacy Act of 1845 was passed through Parliament simultaneously with the 1845 County Asylums Act. The two acts were dependent on each other. The Lunacy Act established the Lunacy Commission and the County Asylums Act set forth most of the provisions as to what was to be monitored within the asylums and helped establish the public network of the county asylums. Like the Lunacy Act, there had been several drafts of this act passed before 1845 and several afterward as well. The most notable of these were the 1808, and the 1853 County Asylum Acts. The Lunacy Act itself was amended several times after its conception. There was a new version written in both 1846 and 1847. Both of these versions were actually repealed by the 1853 County Asylums Act. The importance of these two acts together is that they consolidated Lunacy Law in England. However, no legislation has ever combined the entirety of Lunacy Law. Both of these acts were the basis for Lunacy Law in England until 1890 when both of them were repealed by the Lunacy Act of 1890.^[14]
• 1871 - The Lunacy Regulation (Ireland) Act 1871 was created to manage and protect the estate of "lunatics".^[15] It was repealed by the Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013.^[5]
• 1883 - The Trial of Lunatics Act 1883 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, allowing the jury to return a verdict that the defendant was guilty, but insane at the time, and should be kept in custody as a "criminal lunatic".^[16] This Act was passed at the request of Queen Victoria, who, the target of frequent attacks by mentally ill individuals, demanded that the verdict be changed from "not guilty" so as to act as a deterrent to other lunatics; the phrasing of "guilty of the act or omission charged, but insane so as not to be responsible, according to law, for his actions." remained in use until the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964.^[17] It was cited in 1991 in the case of R v Burgess regarding the automatism defence.^[18] The form of special verdict provided for by this Act was commonly known as guilty but insane. This expression was not an accurate description of that verdict.^[19]
• 1886 - The Idiots Act 1886 (49 Vict.c.25) was an act of Parliament of the United Kingdom. It was intended to give "... facilities for the care, education, and training of Idiots and Imbeciles".^[20] The Act made, for the first time, the distinction between "lunatics", "idiots", and "imbeciles" for the purpose of making entry into education establishments easier and for defining the ways they were cared for. Before the Act, learning institutions for idiots and imbeciles were seen as either "licensed houses" or "registered hospitals" for lunatics, for which the parents of children hoping to enter would have to complete a form stating that they were "a lunatic, an idiot, or a person of unsound mind". Additionally, they were required to answer irrelevant questions and present two medical certificates.^[21] The Act was repealed by the Mental Deficiency Act 1913, by which time two further classifications had been introduced: "feeble-minded people" and "moral defectives".^[22]
• 1886 - The Lunacy (Vacating of Seats) Act 1886 (49 Vict.c.16) was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It provided a mechanism for a Member of Parliament who was judged to be of unsound mind to be removed from his seat.
• 1890 - The Lunacy Act of 1890 repealed the Lunacy Act 1845 (8 & 9 Vict., c. 100) and the County Asylums Act 1845, which had formed mental health law in England and Wales.

1910s

• 1913 - The Mental Deficiency Act 1913 was an act of the United Kingdom which made provisions for the institutional treatment of people deemed to be "feeble-minded" and "moral defectives".^[23] "It proposed an institutional separation so that mental defectives should be taken out of Poor Law institutions and prisons into newly established colonies."^[24] It was repealed by the Mental Health Act 1959. The 1913 act created the Board of Control for Lunacy and Mental Deficiency, which was a United Kingdom body overseeing the treatment of the mentally ill. The Board was created to replace the Commissioners in Lunacy, under the Home Office but independent in that it reported to the Lord Chancellor (who would investigate breaches of care and integrity). It was transferred to the Ministry of Health by the Ministry of Health Act 1919 and reorganized in 1930. The Board consisted of: a Chairman, two Senior Medical Commissioners, one Senior Legal Commissioner, six Commissioners (lawyers and doctors), six Inspectors and administrative staff. By law, at least one of these had to be a woman. The Commissioners of the board went round the country seeing that those detained under the various mental and mental deficiency Acts were legally in custody and that care was proper and moneys and other properties owned by patients were not being misused or stolen. The board was based in Northumberland Avenue, London, until 1939 when it was moved to Hobart House, Grosvenor Place. Its responsibility was limited to England and Wales. Its functions were transferred to the Minister of Health by the National Health Service Act 1946.
• 1915 - People v. Schmidt, 216 N.Y. 324 (1915), is a British criminal case interpreting "wrong" in the M'Naghten rule for an insanity defense.^[11]:621 The M'naghten rule included that a person was not guilty because of insanity if, because of a mental disorder, the defendant was not able to know her act was wrong.^[11]:621 The court interpreted "wrong" to refer to knowledge the act was morally wrong, not knowledge that it was legally wrong.^[11]:621 The court wrote, "The [M'Naghten] court expressly held that a defendant who knew nothing of the law would nonetheless be responsible if he know that the act was wrong, by which, therefore they must have meant, if he knew it was morally wrong... There is nothing to justify the belief that the words right and wrong, when they became limited by M'Naghten's case to the right and wrong of a particular act, casto of theier meaning in terms of morals, and became terms of pure legality."^[11]:621 The court also wrote on knowledge of moral wrongness in the case of a delusion of a deific decree, that God ordered a criminal act, when defendant knows the act is morally and legally wrong, "It seems a mockery to say that, within the meaning of the statute, she knows that the act is wrong."^[11]:621 The court wrote that if a person has an insane delusion that "he has a command from the Almighty to kill, it is difficult to understand how such a man can know that it is wrong for him to do so."^[11]:621

1920s

• 1928-1972: In 1928, the Legislative Assembly of Alberta, Canada, enacted the Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta. The Act, drafted to protect the gene pool, allowed for sterilization of mentally disabled persons in order to prevent the transmission of undesirable traits to offspring. The Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta was repealed in 1972. In 1995, Leilani Muir sued the Province of Alberta for forcing her to be sterilized against her will and without her permission under the Act in 1959, when she was institutionalized at the Provincial Training School for Mental Defectives. Since Muir’s case, the Alberta government has apologized for the forced sterilization of over 2,800 people under the Act. Nearly 850 Albertans who were sterilized under the Sexual Sterilization Act were awarded C$142 million in damages.^[25]

1930s

• 1930 - The Mental Treatment Act 1930 was an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom that permitted voluntary admission to, and outpatient treatment within, psychiatric hospitals. ^[26][27] It also replaced the term "asylum" with "mental hospital".^[27] It was repealed by the Mental Health Act 1959.
• 1933 - 1973: In 1933 British Columbia legislated the Sexual Sterilization Act, which was repealed in 1973, and which closely resembled the Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta, although the practices differed.^[28] The Sexual Sterilization Act of British Columbia created a Board of Eugenics, consisting of a judge, psychiatrist, and social worker.^[28][29] The Board was granted the authority to order the sterilization, with consent, of any inmate recommended to them by a superintendent, who “if discharged…without being subjected to an operation for sexual sterilization would be likely to produce or bear children who by reason of inheritance would have a tendency to serious mental disease or mental deficiency.”^[30] Many of the individuals presented for sterilization under the province’s eugenics program came through Riverview Hospital (Essondale).^[29] "[H]istorian Angus McLaren has estimated that in British Columbia...a few hundred individuals were sterilized".^[31][28]
• 1933 - The Law for the Prevention of Genetically Diseased Offspring (Ger. "Gesetz zur Verhütung erbkranken Nachwuchses") or "Sterilisation Law" was a statute in Nazi Germany enacted on July 14, 1933 (and made active in January 1934)^[32] which allowed the compulsory sterilisation of any citizen who in the opinion of a "Genetic Health Court" (Gr. Erbgesundheitsgericht) suffered from a list of alleged genetic disorders – many of which were not, in fact, genetic. The elaborate interpretive commentary on the law was written by three dominant figures in the racial hygiene movement: Ernst Rüdin, Arthur Gütt and the lawyer Falk Ruttke. The law itself was based on a 'model' American law developed by Harry H. Laughlin. There were three amendments by 1935, most making minor adjustments to how the statute operated or clarifying bureaucratic aspects (such as who paid for the operations). The most significant changes allowed the Higher Court to renounce a patient's right to appeal, and to fine physicians who did not report patients who they knew would qualify for sterilisation under the law. Along with the law, Adolf Hitler personally decriminalised abortion in case of fetuses having racial or hereditary defects for doctors, while the abortion of healthy "pure" German, "Aryan" unborn remained strictly forbidden.^[33]
• 1934 - 1975: Compulsory sterilisation in Sweden (Swedish: Tvångssterilisering i Sverige) occurred between 1934 and 1975. Originally the aim of the sterilisation policy was to protect society and it targeted the so-called feeble-minded or other individuals who were considered unfit; from the 1950s and onwards the law came to be used mostly in the interest of the individual, for social or medical reasons, under varying degrees of pressure from doctors and social workers.^[34] Two indications for compulsory sterilisation were:^[35] 1. Eugenic indication meant sterilisation could be done if a person's offspring would receive undesired genes for insanity, severe illness or physical handicap of other kind. 2. Social indication allowed sterilisation for someone evidently unsuitable to foster a child due to mental illness, being feebleminded or other distortion of the psyche, or having an asocial lifestyle. According to the 2000 governmental report, 21,000 people were estimated to have been forcibly sterilised, and 6,000 were coerced into a 'voluntary' sterilisation while the nature of a further 4,000 cases could not be determined.^[36] The Swedish state subsequently paid out damages to victims who contacted the authorities and asked for compensation.
• 1939 - 1945: Aktion T4 (German, pronounced [akˈtsi̯oːn teː fiːɐ]) was the postwar designation for a programme of mass murder through involuntary euthanasia in Nazi Germany,^[37] which ran officially from September 1939 to August 1941, during which the recorded 70,273 people were killed at various extermination centres located at psychiatric hospitals in Germany and Austria, along with those in occupied Poland.^[38][39][40] About half of the victims were from church-run asylums.^[41] Under the programme certain German physicians were authorized to select patients "deemed incurably sick, after most critical medical examination" and then administer to them a "mercy death" (Gnadentod).^[42] In October 1939 Adolf Hitler signed a "euthanasia decree" backdated to 1 September 1939 that authorized Reichsleiter Philipp Bouhler, the chief of his Chancellery, (not the Reich Chancellery Reichskanzlei) and Karl Brandt, Hitler's personal physician, to carry out the killing. After the nominal end of the programme, physicians in German and Austrian facilities continued many of the practices of Aktion T4, until the defeat of Germany in 1945.^[43][44][45] Robert Lifton and Michael Burleigh estimated that twice the official number of T4 victims may have perished before the end of the war.^[46][45] The estimated range now is between 200,000 and 250,000 unofficial victims of the policy upon the arrival of Allied troops in Germany.^[44]

1940s

• 1940 - The Race Eugenic Protection Law of Japan was submitted from 1934 to 1938 to the Diet. After four amendments, this draft was promulgated as a National Eugenic Law (ja:国民優生法, Kokumin Yusei Hō) in 1940 by the Konoe government.^[47] This law limited compulsory sterilization to "inherited mental disease", promoted genetic screening and restricted birth control access.^[48] According to Matsubara Yoko, from 1940 to 1945, 454 people were sterilized in Japan under this law.^[49]
• 1947 - The School Education Law (Law No. 26) was enacted in Japan, and it provided education for disabled children such as general classes, special classes, non-residential classes, special schools and itinerant teaching, etc.^[50]
• 1947 - The Workmen's Accident Compensation Insurance Law (Law No. 50) was enacted in Japan, and it provided disability pension and disability lump-sum payments, as well as welfare services such as special allowance, medical services, health care, supply of prosthetic appliance, etc.^[50]
• 1947 - The Mail Law (Law No. 165) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that postage for Braille paper and recorded mail for visually impaired persons are free of charge, and parcels for disabled people can be mailed at half the cost. The postage for periodicals published by disabled person groups can be mailed at a small charge.^[50]
• 1948 - According to the Eugenic Protection Law in Japan (1948), sterilization could be enforced on criminals "with genetic predisposition to commit crime", patients with genetic diseases including mild ones such as total color-blindness, hemophilia, albinism and ichthyosis, and mental affections such as schizophrenia, manic-depression possibly deemed occurrent in their opposition and epilepsy.^[51] The mental sicknesses were added in 1952. The provisions also allowed for the surgical sterilization of women, when the woman, her spouse, or family member within the 4th degree of kinship had a serious genetic disorder, and where pregnancy would endanger the life of the woman. The operation required consent of the woman, her spouse and the approval of the Prefectural Eugenic Protection Council.^[52] The law also allowed for abortion for pregnancies in the cases of rape, leprosy, hereditary-transmitted disease, or if the physician determined that the fetus would not be viable outside of the womb. Again, the consent of the woman and her spouse were necessary. Despite the unambiguous wording of the law, the law was used by local authorities as justification for measures enforcing forced sterilization and abortions upon people with certain genetic disorders, as well as leprosy, as well as an excuse for legalized discrimination against people with physical and mental handicaps.^[53] In 1996 this law was replaced by the Maternity Protection Law, which eliminated the provision based on eugenics.^[54]
• 1949 - The Law for the Welfare of Physically Disabled Persons (Law No. 283) was enacted in Japan, and it provided the issuing of a "physically disabled persons' handbook", various counseling services, a grant of prosthetic appliances such as wheelchairs, canes, hearing aids and artificial limbs, technical aids for daily living such as bathtubs, toilet facility, beds and communication aids (e. g. talking machines and word processors, rehabilitation training, services necessary for participation in society such as sign language interpreter, translation Braille, guide helper and modification of motor vehicles, work opportunities, specialized facilities for nursing care, and living places.^[50]

1950s

• 1950 - The Inheritance Tax Law (Law No. 73) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that inheritance tax is reduced in the case of disabled persons' heir. Up to 70 years of age - ¥60,000 per year (¥120,000 for specified disabled persons.)^[50]
• 1950 - The Local Tax Law (Law No. 226) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that Local Resident Tax is reduced (disabled persons with annual incomes of ¥1,250,000 or less get a tax exemption). The Local Resident Tax exemption amounts are as follows: Specified disabled persons - ¥280,000 Other disabled persons - ¥260,000 There are cases of reduction or exemption from automobile taxes, light mobile taxes and automobile purchase taxes.^[50]
• 1950 - The Daily Life Security Law (Law No. 144) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that families who have difficulties in daily life because of their low income are given Public Assistant Benefit to ensure the minimum standard of living, and there is a system of supplemental allowance for disabled persons according to the condition of disability.^[50]
• 1950 - The USSR officially banned the procedure of lobotomy in 1950,^[55][56] on the initiative of Vasily Gilyarovsky.^[57]
• 1950 - The Public Housing Law (Law No. 193) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that when living in public housing, disabled persons are given special consideration. There is a standard of larger living space for families with persons with disabilities. In addition, local public entities give priority in providing to disabled persons public housing and lowering of rent.^[50]
• 1952 - In English law, in R v Windle [1952] 2 QB 826 evidence proved that although the killer did have a mental illness he knew that he was committing a crime. The trial judge thus refused to let the insanity defense go to the jury and this decision was upheld on appeal.^[58]
• 1954 - The Employees' Pension Law (Law No. 115) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that: According to the degree of the insured disability, Employee Disability Pension and Disability Allowance (a one time lump sum for minimal disabilities) are paid.^[50]
• 1957 - The Special Measures Act concerning Temporary Taxation (Law No. 26) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that regarding the Income Tax Law of 1965 (see below), those living severely disabled persons may get supplemental allowance. Supplemental allowance - ¥300,000 ^[50]
• 1957 - Section 2 of the Homicide Act 1957 of the United Kingdom states:

(1) Where a person kills or is party to a killing of another, he shall not be convicted of murder if he was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning which -

• (a) arose from a medical condition
• (b) substantially impaired D's ability to do one or more of the things mentioned in subsection (1A), and
• (c) provides an explanation for D's acts and omissions in doing or being a party to the killing.

(1A) Those things are -

• (a) to understand the nature of D's conduct;
• (b) to form a rational judgment;
• (c) to exercise self-control.

(1B) For the purposes of subsection (1)(c), an abnormality of mental functioning provides and explanation of D's conduct if it causes, or is a significant contributory factor in causing, D to carry out that conduct.

The defence has recently been amended by s. 52 of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009, which came into force on 4 October 2010.^[59] As well, R v Golds^[60] provides a recent authority from the Court of Appeal Criminal Division on how the courts will interpret the term 'substantial' in regard to the Homicide Act 1957. At paragraph [55] of Elias LJ's judgment (following the paragraphing from the neutral citation given below) two senses of the word 'substantial' are identified: (i) something substantial is more than something which is merely trivial or minimal owing to the fact that it has "substance", or (ii) something substantial is big or large (e.g. in the sense that a substantial salary is a large one). At paragraph [72] Elias LJ concludes by opining that the court should (i) leave interpretation of the word 'substantial' to the jury, but if asked for further help should (ii) direct them under the second meaning of the term (i.e. substantial meaning big).

• In English law in R v Kemp [1957] 1 QB 399, where the defendant's arteriosclerosis led to him assaulting his wife while unconscious, it was ruled that in the insanity defense, there should be no distinction made between diseases of the mind, and diseases of the body affecting the operation of the mind, and it should be considered irrelevant whether the insanity was curable or not, or permanent or not. The jury returned a verdict of guilty but insane.^[58]
• 1959 - The National Pension Law (Law No. 1412) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that: There is the Basic Disability Pension, which is granted after having joined the insurance program (Case A) or when a certain degree of disability has occurred prior to the age of 20 years (Case B). In the latter case; however, there is an income limitation. 1st grade - ¥981,900 (¥81,825 per month, 1997) 2nd grade - ¥785,490 (¥65,458 per month, 1997) These grades are different from the degrees indicated in the physically disabled person's handbook.^[50]
• 1959 - The Mental Health Act 1959 was an act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom concerning England and Wales which had, as its main objectives, to abolish the distinction between psychiatric hospitals and other types of hospitals and to deinstituitionalise mental health patients and see them treated more by community care.^[61] It also defined the term mental disorder for the first time: "mental illness as distinct from learning disability. The definition was “mental illness; arrest or incomplete development of mind; psychopathic disorder; and any other disorder or disability of mind”.^[62] At the time, 0.4% of the population of England were housed in asylums, receiving the standard treatments of the time.^[63] Their treatment was considered by the 1957 Percy Commission and the act resulted from its deliberations. The act was designed to make treatment voluntary and informal, and where compulsory give it a proper legal framework and made as a medical decision, and to move treatment, where possible, away from institutional care to that in the community.^[64] The Act repealed the Lunacy and Mental Treatment Acts 1890 to 1930 and the Mental Deficiency Acts 1913 to 1938. Another of the changes introduced by the Act was the abolishment of the category of "moral imbecile".^[65] The category, which had been introduced in 1913, had been defined in such vague terms that it had allowed also mothers of illegitimate children, especially in case of repeated births out of wedlock, to be regarded as "moral imbeciles" and thus to be placed in an institution for defectives or to be placed under guardianship.^[66]

1960s

• 1960 - The Law for Employment Promotion, etc. of the Disabled Persons (Law No. 123) was enacted in Japan, and it provided:

(1) The Quota System: General employers including the government and municipal offices are obligated to employ disabled workers in excess of the quota. The legal quota was: Governmental bodies - 2. 0% (Non-clerical - 1. 9%) Private enterprises - 1. 6% (Specialized juridical person - 1. 9%) The quota was changed in 1998 as follows: Governmental bodies - 2. 1% (Non-clerical - 1. 9%) Private enterprises - 1. 8% (Specialized juridical person - 2. 1%) This ratio does not include mentally ill persons. Employers are obligated to report the number of disabled workers they employ to the head of the Public Employment Security Office annually. This office may announce to the public the names of enterprises who fail to meet the quota and request them to draw up plan for employment of disabled persons to meet the quota.
(2) The Levy and Grant System: This system works by collecting levy from those enterprises that fail to achieve the quota of disabled workers. The funds created by the levy system are used to encourage employers who employ disabled persons above the quota and to promote disabled workers' employment and improve working conditions. Collection of Levies: ¥50,000 a month per person (with more than 300 full-time employees.) Payment of Adjustment Allowance: ¥25,000 per month per person will be paid to the employers who employ disabled workers more than the legal quota (with more than 300 full-time employees). Payment of Rewards: ¥17,000 per month per person will be paid to the employers who employ disabled workers in excess of the fixed number (with less than 300 full-time employees). Payment of Grants: For establishment of work facilities, special employment management, vocational adjustment, ability development, etc. to promote such employment.
(3) Public Vocational Training Allowance for disabled persons and a loan system of funds for purchasing of technical aids and equipments.^[50]

• 1960 - The Law for the Welfare of Mentally Retarded Persons (Law No. 37) was enacted in Japan, and it provided specialized counseling provided by Social Welfare Offices and Rehabilitation Consultation Centers, training for independent life, in-house services such as home helper, day care and short stay programs, etc., technical aids for daily living such as electric toothbrush and special type mat, etc., living space such as welfare homes and group homes, etc., and specialized facilities to help daily life such as residential facilities for rehabilitation, nonresidential facilities and so on.^[50]
• 1960 - The Road Traffic Law (Law No. 105) was enacted in Japan, and it provided safe transportation for visually impaired persons. Thus, sighted persons are prohibited to walk with a white or yellow cane, and to walk with a guide dog.^[50]
• 1964 - The Special Child Rearing Allowance Law (Law No. 134) was enacted in Japan, and it provided - Special Allowance for Disabled Persons: Provided to those 20 years of age and over with degrees of disability requiring special care and attention in daily life due to serious disability either mental or physical. ¥26,230 per month with income limitation (1997). Special Child Rearing Allowance: Granted to parents or guardians of children, under 20 years of age with moderate/severe disability. ¥50,350 per month for those with severe disability (1997). ¥33,530 per month for those with moderate disability (1997). Welfare Allowance for Disabled Children: ¥14,270 per month is granted to children with severe disabilities.^[50]
• 1964 - The Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964 was enacted. In English law, if a defendant at the time of trial claims he is insane, this hinges on whether or not he is able to understand the charge, the difference between "guilty" and "not guilty" and is able to instruct his lawyers. If he is unable to do these things, he can be found "unfit to plead" under Section 4 of the Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964. In that situation, the judge has wide discretion as to what to do with the defendant, except in cases of murder, where he must be detained in hospital.^[67]
• 1965 - The Income Tax Law (Law No. 33) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that taxpayers with disability or who have a disabled family member may get exemption from income tax. The exemptions are as follows: Specified disabled persons, that is (a) Grade 1 or 2 in a physically disabled person's handbook or (b) Severe level in a handbook for people with mental retardation - ¥350,000 Disabled persons other than above - ¥270,000 ^[50]
• 1966 - The Employment Countermeasures Law (Law No. 132) was enacted in Japan, and it provided measures to improve vocational training for people with disabilities and assist them to find employment, vocational training facilities and improvement of training contents, training of guidance workers and the enhancement of their quality, the supply of an allowance for adjustment training, and the supply of a training allowance to employers.^[50]
• 1968 - After a long campaign by The Sunday Times, a compensation settlement for the UK victims of thalidomide was reached with Distillers Company (now part of Diageo), which had distributed the drug in the UK.^[68][69] This compensation, which is distributed by the Thalidomide Trust in the UK, was substantially increased by Diageo in 2005.^[70] The UK Government gave survivors a grant of £20 million, to be distributed through the Thalidomide Trust, in December 2009.^[71]
• 1969 - The Human Resources Development Promotion Law (Law No. 64) was enacted in Japan, and it established Vocational Ability Development Centers for Disabled Persons.^[50]

1970s

• 1970s - By the 1970s, numerous countries had banned the procedure of lobotomy.^[72]
• 1970 - A large criminal trial regarding thalidomide was held in Germany, charging several Grünenthal officials with negligent homicide and injury. After Grünenthal settled with the victims in April 1970, the trial ended in December 1970 with no finding of guilt; however, as part of the settlement, Grünenthal paid 100 million DM into a special foundation. The German government added 320 million DM. The foundation paid victims a one-time sum of 2,500-25,000 DM (depending on severity of disability) and a monthly stipend of 100-450 DM. The monthly stipends have since been raised substantially and are now paid entirely by the government (as the foundation has run out of money). Grünenthal paid another 50 million Euros into the foundation in 2008.
• 1970 - The Disabled Persons' Fundamental Law (Law No. 84; major revision in 1993) was enacted in Japan. It includes:

"Article 2 (Definition): "Disabled persons" as used in this Law means persons whose daily life or life in society is substantially limited over the long term due to a physical disability, mental retardation or mental disability.
Article 3 (Fundamental Principles): The dignity of all disabled persons shall be respected. They shall have the right to be treated accordingly. All disabled persons shall, as members of society, be provided with opportunities to fully participate in such a manner.
Article 4 (Responsibilities of the State and Local Public Entities): The State and local public bodies shall be responsible for promoting the welfare of disabled persons and for preventing disabilities.
Article 5 (Responsibilities of the Nation): The nation shall, on the basis of the principle of social solidarity, endeavor to cooperate in promoting the welfare of disabled persons.
Article 6 (Efforts to Achieve Independence): Disabled persons shall endeavor to participate actively in social and economic activities by making effective use of the abilities they possess. The family members of disabled persons shall endeavor to promote independence of disabled persons.
Article 6-2 (Disabled Persons' Day): Disabled Persons' Day shall be established for the purpose of raising the public awareness to the welfare of disabled persons and stimulating disabled persons' desire to actively participate in social, economic, cultural and other areas of activity.
Article 7 (Fundamental Policies): The measures regarding the welfare of disabled persons shall be carried out according to their age and to the types and severity of disabilities."

There are other fundamental principles in this law regarding programs for persons with disability covering the State, Metropolitan and prefectural governments, and cities, towns and villages; as well as those regarding medicine, education, employment, pension, housing, public facilities, information, culture, sports, etc. The total number of the Articles of this law is 29.^[50][73]

• 1970 - Disability activist Hiroshi Yokota (a member of Aoi Shiba no Kai) published the declaration of activity, “We Act Like This,” in their journal Ayumi in 1970. It stated in full (with asterisks before each point replaced by dashes for clarity),

"- We identify ourselves as people with Cerebral Palsy (CP). We recognize our position as 'an existence which should not exist,' in the modern society. We believe that this recognition should be the starting point of our whole movement, and we act on this belief.

- We assert ourselves aggressively. When we identify ourselves as people with CP, we have a will to protect ourselves. We believe that a strong self-assertion is the only way to achieve self-protection, and we act on this belief.

- We deny love and justice. We condemn egoism held by love and justice. We believe that mutual understanding, accompanying the human observation which arises from the denial of love and justice, means the true well-being, and we act on this belief.

- We do not choose the way of problem solving. We have learnt from our personal experiences that easy solutions to problems lead to dangerous compromises. We believe that an endless confrontation is the only course of action possible for us, and we act on this belief."^[74] This declaration became an epoch making event in the Japanese disability movement.^[75] Later a fifth point was added, stating in full, "We deny able-bodied civilization. We recognize that modern civilization has managed to sustain itself only by excluding us, people with CP. We believe that creation of our own culture through our movement and daily life leads to the condemnation of modern civilization, and we act on this belief."^[74]

• 1972 - The Committee on Mentally Abnormal Offenders, widely referred to as the Butler Committee after its chairman Lord Butler of Saffron Walden, was set up in 1972 by the Government of the United Kingdom. The Committee submitted an Interim Report in 1974 and published a Final Report in October 1975, proposing major reforms to the law and to psychiatric services.
• 1973 - In English law, in R v Quick and Paddison [1973] QB 910, the courts decided that an assault committed when the defendant was suffering from hypoglycemia due to the taking of insulin was not insane in nature.
• 1978 - The Basaglia Law or Law 180 (Italian: Legge Basaglia, Legge 180) is the Italian Mental Health Act of 1978 which signified a large reform of the psychiatric system in Italy, contained directives for the closing down of all psychiatric hospitals^[76] and led to their gradual replacement with a whole range of community-based services, including settings for acute in-patient care.^[77] The Basaglia Law is the basis of Italian mental health legislation.^[78]:64 The principal proponent of Law 180^[79]:70 and its architect was Italian psychiatrist Franco Basaglia.^[80]:8 Therefore, Law 180 is known as the “Basaglia Law” from the name of its promoter.^[81] The Parliament of Italy enacted Law 180 on May 13, 1978, and thereby initiated the gradual dismantling of psychiatric hospitals.^[82] Implementation of the psychiatric reform law was accomplished in 1998 which marked the very end of the state psychiatric hospital system in Italy.^[83]

1980s

• 1981 - The United Nations established this year as the International Year of Disabled Persons. At the conclusion of the year the UN called on member nations to establish in their own countries organizations for and about people with disabilities.
• 1981 - Gini Laurie organized the first international conference on post-polio problems.^[84]
• 1981 - Argentina enacted "Comprehensive Protection System for the Disabled" in order to give disabled people health care, education, and social security.^[85]
• 1982 - The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms declared physical or mental disability as a prohibited reason for discrimination; this was the first time that such a right was guaranteed in the Constitution of a country. Section 15 of the Charter makes it illegal for any governments in Canada to discriminate against persons with disabilities in their laws and programs.^[86]
• 1983: The Mental Health Act 1983 (c.20) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which applies to people in England and Wales. It covers the reception, care and treatment of mentally disordered persons, the management of their property and other related matters. In particular, it provides the legislation by which people diagnosed with a mental disorder can be detained in hospital or police custody and have their disorder assessed or treated against their wishes, unofficially known as "sectioning". Its use is reviewed and regulated by the Care Quality Commission. The Act has been significantly amended by the Mental Health Act 2007. Notably, the 1983 Act classified psychosurgery as a treatment that could only be carried out with a patient’s consent. Under section 57 of the Act, which applies to both detained and informal patients, a panel of three people appointed by the Mental Health Act Commission has to establish that the patient is consenting. Then the psychiatrist on the panel authorises the operation if it is likely to alleviate or prevent deterioration in the patient’s condition.^[87] The 1983 act (as amended by the 2007 act) also defines the designated relationship of [[nearest relative].^[88] It is the duty of the Approved mental health professional to determine who is the nearest relative of the patient and consult them in the process of assessment, treatment or guardianship.^[88] Also, Section 1 of the Mental Health (Discrimination) Act 2013 (introduced into Parliament as the Mental Health (Discrimination) (No. 2) Bill)^[89] removed from the Mental Health Act 1983 the provision that disqualifies from the House of Commons a member sectioned for over six months under that Act.
• 1983 - The United Nations expanded the International Year of Disabled Persons to the International Decade of Disabled Persons (1983–1992).
• 1983 - Care in the Community (also called "Community Care" or "Domiciled Care") is the British policy of deinstitutionalization, treating, and caring for physically and mentally disabled people in their homes rather than in an institution. Institutional care was the target of widespread criticism during the 1960s and 1970s,^[90] but it was not until 1983 that the government of Margaret Thatcher adopted a new policy of care after the Audit Commission published a report called 'Making a Reality of Community Care'^[91] which outlined the advantages of domiciled care.
• 1984 - In English law, in R v Sullivan, a man was charged with grievous bodily harm under the Offences against the Person Act 1861 after assaulting his friend during an epileptic seizure. The House of Lords ruled that Sullivan was indeed insane, and that "it does not lie within the power of the courts to alter [the insanity test]".^[92]
• 1984 - The Telecommunication Service Law (Law No. 86) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that disabled persons may get NTT telephone directory service for a free of charge, and persons with speech disorder may get lower fee of usage fee of public telephone through calling by credit.^[50]
• 1984 - The Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 was enacted. One of the main purposes of the Mental Health (Public Safety and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 1999 is to introduce a right of appeal against a decision, notification or recommendation of a sheriff in relation to an appeal brought by a restricted patient in terms of Part VI of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. The right of appeal against the sheriff’s decision, notification or recommendation is conferred on both the patient and the Scottish Ministers. The appeal is to the Court of Session. The 1984 act was subsequently largely replaced by the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003.
• 1985 - The International Polio Network was founded by Gini Laurie, and began advocating for recognition of post-polio syndrome.
• 1985 - The Canadian Human Rights Act was enacted, and it banned discrimination against people due to their physical or mental disability. Furthermore, the Act requires federally regulated employers to prevent discrimination and to provide access and support to individuals with disabilities.^[86][93]
• 1986 - Justice Frank Vincent of the Supreme Court of Victoria in Australia ordered a hospital to take "all necessary means" to save a nine-day-old baby boy suffering from spina bifida, rejecting the hospital's view that only "ordinary treatment" should be given. During the case, Justice Vincent ruled that nobody "has any power to determine that the life of any child, however disabled that child may be, will be deliberately taken away from it .... [The law] does not permit any decisions to be made concerning the quality of life, nor does it enable ... any assessment to be made as to the value of any human being."^[94] In that case, the grandparents had sought legal means to keep the baby alive, and Justice Vincent made the baby a ward of the court.^[95] However, the doctors and hospital did not present their side to the court or provide evidence to explain their recommendation.^[96]
• 1987 - Gini Laurie founded the International Ventilator Users Network (IVUN).
• 1988 - The Consumption Tax Law (Law No. 108) was enacted in Japan, and it provided that items for disabled persons (e. g. prosthesis, cane, artificial eyes, Braille writer and wheelchair) are exempted from consumption tax.^[50]
• 1989 - In English law, in R v Hennsey [1989] 1 WLR 287 it was held that a crime committed while the defendant was suffering from hyperglycemia did constitute insanity.

1990s

• 1990 - China enacted the Law of the People's Republic of China on the Protection of Disabled Persons, which (among other provisions) declared that China must "provide disabled persons with special assistance by adopting supplementary methods and supportive measures with a view to alleviating or eliminating the effects of their disabilities and external barriers and ensuring the realization of their rights...provide special assurance, treatment and pension to wounded or disabled servicemen and persons disabled while on duty or for protecting the interests of the State and people...guarantee the right of disabled persons to education...[and] guarantee disabled persons' right to work," as well as banning discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, engagement, status regularization, promotion, determining technical or professional titles, payment for labor, welfare, labor insurance or in other aspects.^[97]
• 1990 - MindFreedom International is an international coalition of over one hundred grassroots groups and thousands of individual members from fourteen nations, based in America and founded in 1990. It was created to advocate against forced medication, medical restraints, and involuntary electroconvulsive therapy. Its stated mission is to protect the rights of people who have been labeled with psychiatric disorders.
• 1991 - Care Programme Approach (CPA) in the United Kingdom is a system of delivering community mental health services to individuals diagnosed with a mental illness. It was introduced in England in 1991^[98] and by 1996 become a key component of the mental health system in England.^[99] The approach requires that health and social services assess need, provided a written care plan, allocate a care coordinator, and then regularly review the plan with key stakeholders,^[100] in keeping with the National Health Service and Community Care Act 1990.
• 1991 - R v Burgess [1991] 2 QB 92 is a decision of the Court of Appeal of England and Wales that found sleepwalking as insane automatism. In a previous decision, Burgess was found not guilty by reason of insanity because his case fell under the M'Naghten Rules. Burgess appealed his previous verdict on the grounds he was not guilty due to automatism because he did not have the mens rea to make him guilty. However, the court ruled that sleepwalking was considered insane automatism and Burgess' appeal was denied.
• 1992 - The Disability Discrimination Act became law in Australia, and it banned discrimination against people with disabilities in employment, education, access to premises, accommodation, buying or selling land, activities of clubs, sport, administration of Commonwealth laws and programs, provision of goods, and services and facilities.^[101]
• 1992 - The Disabled Persons Act, Act Number 5 of 1992 was adopted by Zimbabwe. This Act provides for the welfare and rehabilitation of disabled persons, the appointment and functions of a Director for Disabled Persons' Affairs, and the establishment and functions of a National Disability Board. Discrimination against disabled persons in employment, and denial to disabled persons of access to public premises, services and amenities are prohibited.^[102]
• 1993 - The Law for Promoting Businesses that Facilitate the Use of Communications and Broadcast Services by the Physically Disabled Persons (Law No. 54) was enacted in Japan, and it promoted services to make media like telecommunications and broadcast accessible to people with disabilities. For instance, it provided subsidies for the production of superimposed television programs or those with narrations explaining the action.^[50]
• 1993 - New Zealand passes the Human Rights Act 1993, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of physical, intellectual and psychiatric disabilities, except in cases of insurance policies. HIV status is also included within the legislation. Discrimination is banned within accommodation, employment and goods and service provision.
• 1994 - The Law for Buildings Accessible to and Usable by the Elderly and Physically Disabled Persons (Law No. 44) was enacted in Japan. It aims to build public buildings which meet the needs of people with disabilities. It is also called the "Heartful Building Law." ^[50]
• 1995 - In 1995 Leilani Muir sued the Province of Alberta for forcing her to be sterilized against her will and without her permission under the Sexual Sterilization Act of Alberta in 1959, when she was institutionalized at the Provincial Training School for Mental Defectives. Since Muir’s case, the Alberta government has apologized for the forced sterilization of over 2,800 people under the Act. Nearly 850 Albertans who were sterilized under the Sexual Sterilization Act were awarded C$142 million in damages.^[25]
• 1995 - The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA 1995) became law in the United Kingdom.^[103] This made it unlawful in the United Kingdom to discriminate against people with disabilities in relation to employment, the provision of goods and services, education, and transport.^[103] The Equality and Human Rights Commission provides support for this Act. Equivalent legislation exists in Northern Ireland, which is enforced by the Northern Ireland Equality Commission.
• 1996 - The Eugenic Protection Law in Japan was replaced by the Maternity Protection Law, which eliminated the provision based on eugenics.^[54]
• 1997 - In DPP v Harper [1997], it was decided that the insanity defence could also be applied in the Magistrates' Court of England and Wales.^[104]
• 1997 - In Eldridge v. British Columbia (Attorney General) [1997] 2 S.C.R. 624, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that sign language interpreters must be provided in the delivery of medical services where doing so is necessary to ensure effective communication.^[105]
• 1998 - In R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust the House of Lords ruled that a man who had been informally admitted to a psychiatric hospital without capable consent had not been unlawfully detained under the common law. A later European Court of Human Rights ruling, however, found that the man had been unlawfully deprived of his liberty in the meaning of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
• 1999 - The Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 abolished the National Disability Council and replaced it with a Disability Rights Commission. Like the Council, the Commission covered England, Scotland and Wales. However unlike the Council it also had power to support individuals seeking to enforce their rights (Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 s.7) and powers of investigation (Disability Rights Commission Act 1999 s.3).^[106]
• 1999 - The Mental Health (Public Safety and Appeals) (Scotland) Act 1999 was an Act of the Scottish Parliament which was passed by the Parliament in September 1999 and was designed to close a loophole in the law which led to the release of mentally ill killer, Noel Ruddle, who was released from the state hospital at Carstairs after arguing its treatment programmes were no longer of benefit to him. The Act had two main purposes: The first was to add a new criterion to the statutory tests applied by a sheriff or the Scottish Ministers when considering whether to order the discharge of a restricted patient. The sheriff and the Scottish Ministers must now refuse to order a discharge (either conditional or absolute) if satisfied that the patient has a mental disorder, the effect of which is that continuing detention in hospital is necessary to protect the public from serious harm. That is so whether or not the patient is to receive medical treatment for the mental disorder. The second is to introduce a right of appeal against a decision, notification or recommendation of a sheriff in relation to an appeal brought by a restricted patient in terms of Part VI of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. The right of appeal against the sheriff’s decision, notification or recommendation is conferred on both the patient and the Scottish Ministers. The appeal is to the Court of Session. The Act also widens the term 'mental disorder', which appears in earlier legislation, to include a personality disorder.

2000s

• 2000 - The Adults with Incapacity (Scotland) Act 2000 (2000 asp 4) is an Act of the Scottish Parliament. It was passed on 29 March 2000, receiving royal assent on 9 May. It concerns the welfare of adults (the age of legal capacity in Scotland being 16) who are unable to make decisions for themselves because they have a mental disorder or are not able to communicate. It provides the framework for other people (such as carers) to act on the behalf of people with incapacity.
• 2001 - In R. v. Latimer [2001] 1 S.C.R. 3, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Robert Latimer's crime of murdering his disabled daughter Tracy Latimer could not be justified through the defence of necessity. Furthermore, the Supreme Court of Canada found that despite the special circumstances of the case, the lengthy prison sentence given to Mr. Latimer was not cruel and unusual, and therefore not a breach of section 12 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.^[107]
• 2003 - The Forensic Network (the shortened name of the Forensic Mental Health Services Managed Care Network) is one of Scotland's Managed Clinical Networks^[108] and it was established in Scotland in September 2003 by Scottish Government, in conjunction with "The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003",^[109] and following a review of the State Hospital's Board for Scotland, 'The Right Place - The Right Time'.^[110]
• 2003 - In Starson v. Swayze, 2003 SCC 32, [2003] 1 S.C.R. 722, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Mr. Starson had the right to refuse psychiatric medication because the Consent and Capacity board did not have enough evidence to support its finding that Mr. Starson was incapable of deciding on treatment.^[111]
• 2003 - On March 18, 2003 the UK government formally recognized that British Sign Language was a language in its own right.^[112]
• 2003 - The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, which came into effect on 5 October 2005, is an Act of the Scottish Parliament which enables medical professionals to detain and treat people against their will on grounds of mental disorder, with the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland and the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland providing safeguards against mistreatment. It largely replaces the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. TWo particularly notable features of the 2003 act are as follows: Under section 234 of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, psychosurgery can only be carried out on consenting patients if a panel from the Mental Welfare Commission confirms that the patient’s consent is valid and that the operation is in their best interests. It may also be carried out on incapable patients, as long as they are not objecting, with Court of Session approval, but since the law came into force, no non-consenting patients have undergone psychosurgery. Secondly, in Scotland the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 gives patients with capacity the right to refuse ECT.^[113]
• 2004 - In the case HL v UK (45508/99) the European Court of Human Rights found that the informal admission to a psychiatric hospital of a compliant but incapacitated adult was in contravention of Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The court found that the distinction between actual and potential detention relied upon by the UK House of Lords in their ruling that HL had not been detained in R v Bournewood Community and Mental Health NHS Trust was not of central importance under Article 5. The European Court also held that the practice of informal admission of compliant but incapacitated adults who were de facto detained was not 'in accordance with a procedure described by law' and thus was not lawful under the Convention.^[114] The case resulted in major changes to the admission procedures for incapacitated adults to care homes and hospitals in the UK where they are, or may be, deprived of their liberty (see Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards).
• 2005 - The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 is a statute enacted in 2005 for the purpose of improving accessibility standards for Ontarians with physical and mental disabilities to all public establishments by 2025. Some employers began taking steps to bring their organizations into compliance in 2005.^[115]
• 2005 - New Zealand established a reconciliation initiative in 2005 to address the ongoing compensation payouts to ex-patients of state-run mental institutions in the 1970s to 1990s. A number of grievances were heard, including: poor reasons for admissions; unsanitary and overcrowded conditions; lack of communication to patients and family members; physical violence and sexual misconduct and abuse; inadequate mechanisms for dealing with complaints; pressures and difficulties for staff, within an authoritarian hierarchy based on containment; fear and humiliation in the misuse of seclusion; over-use and abuse of ECT, psychiatric medications, and other treatments as punishments, including group therapy, with continued adverse effects; lack of support on discharge; interrupted lives and lost potential; and continued stigma, prejudice, and emotional distress and trauma. There were some references to instances of helpful aspects or kindnesses despite the system. Participants were offered counselling to help them deal with their experiences, along with advice on their rights, including access to records and legal redress.^[116]
• 2005 - The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (c 9) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom applying to England and Wales. Its primary purpose is to provide a legal framework for acting and making decisions on behalf of adults who lack the capacity to make particular decisions for themselves.^[117] It was amended by the Mental Health Act 2007.
• 2006 - In the United Kingdom, the Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) is a joint police/mental health unit set up in October 2006 by the Home Office, the Department of Health and Metropolitan Police Service to assess and manage the risk to politicians, members of the British Royal Family, and other public figures from obsessive individuals.^[118][119]
• 2006 - The Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 strengthened and extended the coverage of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, increasing the scope of legislation to include more people with disabilities, such as people diagnosed with cancer, HIV, and multiple sclerosis (MS), but not yet showing signs of their illness. Also, people with mental ill health no longer had to prove their condition was “clinically well-recognised”. The new laws also provided extra protection for disabled people in other areas such as private clubs and in discriminatory job advertisements, and provided that all trains will have to be fully accessible to the disabled by 2020.^[120]
• 2006 - The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) was adopted by the United Nations in 2006.^[121]
• 2006 - The Equality Act 2006 was passed in the United Kingdom. The 2006 Act is a precursor to the Equality Act 2010, which combines all of the equality enactments within Great Britain and provides comparable protections across all equality strands. Those explicitly mentioned by the Equality Act 2006 include age; disability; gender; proposed, commenced or completed gender reassignment; race; religion or belief and sexual orientation. The changes it made included creating the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), merging the Commission for Racial Equality, the Equal Opportunities Commission and the Disability Rights Commission.
• 2007 - The Mental Health Act 2007 (c 12) is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It amends the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. It applies to people in England and Wales.^[122] Most of the Act was implemented on 3 November 2008.^[123]

It introduces significant changes which include:

1. Introduction of Supervised Community Treatment, including Community Treatment Orders (CTOs). This new power replaces supervised discharge with a power to return the patient to hospital, where the person may be forcibly medicated, if the medication regime is not being complied with in the community. 2. Redefining professional roles: broadening the range of mental health professionals who can be responsible for the treatment of patients without their consent. 3. Creating the role of approved clinician, which is a registered healthcare professional (social worker, nurse, psychologist or occupational therapist) approved by the appropriate authority to act for purposes of the Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended). 4. Replacing the role of approved social worker by the role of approved mental health professional; the person fulfilling this role need not be a social worker.^[124] 5. Nearest relative: making it possible for some patients to appoint a civil partner as nearest relative. 6. Definition of mental disorder: introduce a new definition of mental disorder throughout the Act, abolishing previous categories 7. Criteria for Involuntary commitment: introduce a requirement that someone cannot be detained for treatment unless appropriate treatment is available and removes the treatability test. 8. Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT): improve patient safeguards by taking an order-making power which will allow the current time limit to be varied and for automatic referral by hospital managers to the MHRT. 9. Introduction of independent mental health advocates (IMHAs) for 'qualifying patients'. 10. Electroconvulsive Therapy may not be given to a patient who has capacity to refuse consent to it, and may only be given to an incapacitated patient where it does not conflict with any advance directive, decision of a donee or deputy or decision of the Court of Protection.^[123][125]

• 2008 - The whole mental health tribunal system in England changed in 2008. As a result, in England, the Mental Health Review Tribunal as a standalone process was technically abolished and became one part of a Health and Social Care Chamber of a newly established national level of hearings called the First-tier Tribunal. It is now technically known as the First-tier Tribunal (Mental Health), but in practice is often called the Mental Health Tribunal. A new Upper Tribunal was also created, which hears appeals against decisions by the First-tier. In Wales, the tribunal is still the Mental Health Review Tribunal for Wales.
• 2008 - 2010: In 2008, the Perm Krai ombudswoman Tatyana Margolina reported that 14 women with disabilities were subjected to compulsory medical sterilization in the Ozyorskiy psychoneurological nursing home whose director was Grigory Bannikov.^[126] The sterilizations were performed not on the basis of a mandatory court decision appropriate for them, but only on the basis of the application by the guardian Bannikov.^[127] On 2 December 2010, however, the court did not find corpus delicti in the compulsory medical sterilizations performed by his consent.^[126]
• 2009 - Until 2009 in England and Wales, the Mental Health Act 1983 allowed the use of ECT on detained patients whether or not they had capacity to consent to it. However, following amendments which took effect in 2009, ECT may not generally be given to a patient who has capacity and refuses it, irrespective of his or her detention under the Act.^[128] However, there is an exception regardless of consent and capacity; under Section 62 of the Act, if the treating psychiatrist says the need for treatment is urgent they may start a course of ECT without authorization.^[129]

2010s

• 2010 - The Mental Health (Wales) Measure 2010 is a piece of legislation introduced to Wales by Health Minister Edwina Hart for both Health and Social Services. The measure was passed by the National Assembly for Wales on 2 November 2010.^[130]
• 2010 - The Disability Discrimination (Transport Vehicles) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009 came into operation on 25 January 2010. These Regulations lift the exemption which applied to transport providers from Part 3 of the DDA. This means that from 25 January 2010 transport providers must not discriminate against disabled people when providing goods, facilities, and services.^[131]
• 2010 - The Equality Act 2010 was passed in the United Kingdom. The primary purpose of the Act is to consolidate the complicated and numerous array of Acts and Regulations which formed the basis of anti-discrimination law in Great Britain.^[132]
• 2011 - AH v West London Mental Health Trust was a landmark case in England, which established a legal precedent in 2011 when Albert Laszlo Haines (AH), a patient in Broadmoor Hospital, a high security psychiatric hospital, was able to exercise a right to a fully open and public mental health review tribunal to hear his appeal for release. The case and the legal principles it affirmed have been described as opening up the secret world of tribunals and National Health Service secure units, and as having substantial ramifications for mental health professionals and solicitors, though how frequently patients will be willing or able to exercise the right is not yet clear.^[133] The detention of Haines under the Mental Health Act had been continuous since 1986, mainly at Broadmoor Hospital run by West London Mental Health NHS Trust. The tribunal panel ultimately decided there were sufficient grounds for continued psychiatric detention but recommended better collaborative work towards psychiatric rehabilitation and gradual supported pathways to lower security then release to community mental health services.^[134]
• 2012 - The Supreme Court of India declared that a deaf and mute person need not be prevented from being presented as a witness in court merely on account of their physical disability. The court explained that a deaf and mute person can testify in writing or through gestures.^[135][136]
• 2012 - On 31 August 2012, Grünenthal chief executive Harald F. Stock, PhD, who served as the Chief Executive Officer of Grünenthal GmbH from January 2009 to May 28, 2013 and was also a Member of Executive Board until May 28, 2013, apologized for the first time for producing thalidomide and remaining silent about the birth defects caused by it.^[137] At a ceremony, Stock unveiled a statue of a disabled child to symbolize those harmed by thalidomide and apologized for not trying to reach out to victims for over 50 years. At the time of the apology, there were 5,000 to 6,000 sufferers still alive. Victim advocates called the apology "insulting" and "too little, too late", and criticized the company for not compensating victims. They also criticized the company for their claim that no one could have known the harm the drug caused, arguing that there were plenty of red flags at the time.^[138]
• 2012 - On 17 July 2012, Lynette Rowe of Australia (who was born without limbs due to thalidomide) was awarded an out-of-court settlement, believed to be in the millions of dollars and paving the way for class action victims to receive further compensation.
• 2012 - The government of England announced a £2.6 million fund from 2012 until March 2014 to help people with disabilities become MPs, councillors, and police and crime commissioners.^[139]
• 2012 - Canada's Department of Veterans Affairs ended its policy of deducting the amount of disabled veterans' pensions from benefits for lost earnings and Canadian Forces income support, which were introduced in 2006 under the New Veterans Charter.^[140]
• 2013 - Turkey officially removed words considered insulting to people with disabilities (such as “gimp” and “faulty”) from over 95 of its laws.^[141]
• 2013 - Guide dogs began to be allowed at the Western Wall, due to a new ruling by Western Wall Rabbi Shmuel Rabinovitch.^[142]
• 2013 - The Irish Assisted Decision-Making (Capacity) Bill 2013 repealed the Marriage of Lunatics Act, 1811 and the Lunacy Regulation (Ireland) Act 1871.^[5]
• 2013 - The Mental Health (Discrimination) Act 2013 (introduced into Parliament as the Mental Health (Discrimination) (No. 2) Bill)^[89] is an Act of Parliament of the United Kingdom which has four sections. Section 1 ("Members of Parliament etc") removes from the Mental Health Act 1983 the provision that disqualifies from the House of Commons a member sectioned for over six months under that Act. Section 2 ("Jurors") qualifies the restrictions of jury members who are receiving mental health treatment.^[143] Section 3 ("Company directors") modifies Regulations in relation to the employment of director's appointments. The final section gives the Secretary of State power to determine when the section relating to juries take effect; the other provisions came into force with Royal Assent.
• 2014 - The German national memorial to the people with disabilities systematically murdered by the Nazis was dedicated in 2014 in Berlin.^[144][145] It is located in Berlin in a site next to the Tiergarten park, which is the former location of a villa at Tiergartenstrasse 4 where more than 60 Nazi bureaucrats and doctors worked in secret under the "T4" program to organize the mass murder of sanatorium and psychiatric hospital patients deemed unworthy to live.^[145]
• 2014 - R v Golds^[60] provides a recent authority from the Court of Appeal Criminal Division on how the courts will interpret the term 'substantial' in regard to the Homicide Act 1957 of the United Kingdom. At paragraph [55] of Elias LJ's judgment (following the paragraphing from the neutral citation given below) two senses of the word 'substantial' are identified: (i) something substantial is more than something which is merely trivial or minimal owing to the fact that it has "substance", or (ii) something substantial is big or large (e.g. in the sense that a substantial salary is a large one). At paragraph [72] Elias LJ concludes by opining that the court should (i) leave interpretation of the word 'substantial' to the jury, but if asked for further help should (ii) direct them under the second meaning of the term (i.e. substantial meaning big).
• 2014 - The European Court of Justice ruled that if obesity hinders "full and effective participation in professional life," it could count as a disability.^[146] Discrimination on the grounds of disability is illegal under European Union law.^[146] This ruling came in the case of Karsten Kaltoft, a Danish child-minder who said he was unfairly fired for being fat.^[146]
• 2014 - In May 2014, the World Health Organization, OHCHR, UN Women, UNAIDS, UNDP, UNFPA and UNICEF issued a joint statement on Eliminating forced, coercive and otherwise involuntary sterilization, An interagency statement. The report references the involuntary sterilization of a number of specific population groups. They include among others, people with disabilities, often perceived as asexual. Women with intellectual disabilities are "often treated as if they have no control, or should have no control, over their sexual and reproductive choices". Other rationales include menstrual management for "women who have or are perceived to have difficulties coping with or managing menses, or whose health conditions (such as epilepsy) or behaviour are negatively affected by menses." The report recommends a range of guiding principles for medical treatment, including ensuring patient autonomy in decision-making, ensuring non-discrimination, accountability and access to remedies.
• 2015 - The Inter-American Commission on Human Rights granted precautionary measures to Jessica Liliana Ramirez, who had epidermolysis bullosa, stating that, "The IACHR asks Colombia to adopt the necessary measures in order to preserve the life and personal integrity of the beneficiary, considering the specific aspects of the disease that she faces, with the purpose of ensuring that she has access to proper medical treatment, according to the technical guidances of the Pan-American Health Organization and other international standards that may be applicable," in its ruling.^[147]
• 2015 - The Court of Protection of the United Kingdom ruled that a woman with six children and an IQ of 70 should be sterilized for her own safety because another pregnancy would have been a "significantly life-threatening event" for her and the fetus.^[148]
• 2017 - Authorities in Japan released an official record showing that a girl was forcibly sterilized in 1972 because of her intellectual disability; an official of a civic group stated that this "must be the first disclosure in Japan of a record of an individual who underwent an eugenic sterilization operation."^[54]

References