"That's nice, madam, but this person needs a doctor..."
A factory worker who was sacked for attacking a colleague has won a disability discrimination claim after a tribunal ruled he was suffering from 'diabetic rage'.
Wait, that's a thing? Really? Well, I guess he had a doctor to prove his...
Oh, maybe not:
At the tribunal, Mr Dytkowski was 'very frank' that he had sought but failed to get evidence from his clinicians which supported his view, explaining doctors 'could not say for sure'.
Yeah, I guess that doesn't matter though, because who needs medical experts?
But Employment Judge Joanne Dunlop agreed with him and ruled that he was discriminated on grounds of his disability and unfairly dismissed.
'He is not a medical expert but, at least to some extent, we are entitled to treat him as an expert on his own condition and how he experiences the effects of it.'
/facepalm
OK So the next time I lose my rag I shall self-identify as temporarily diabetic.
ReplyDeleteNo, it's definitely a thing.
ReplyDeleteI used to have bouts of unexplainable rage, but I have since discovered that the undelying cause is my diabetes, and it's become a lot more controllable.
To be super clear, it's not the diabetes, but the blood sugar level and not understanding its effect on me. Knowing the latter better allows me to step back (mentally) and focus on fixing my blood sugar. Taking a hard 20 min walk literally solves the problem.
Even more so since I started to manage the underlying condition (type 2 diabetes) more effectively than previously.
I understand your incredulity at the use of this as a defence. It's a bit like a headache. How can you objectively measure (prove) the symptoms / severity? And I don't agree with the tribunal outcome, despite lacking all the facts. Was he sacked for attacking someone, or just for being diabetic?
-- Justin