| This thesis examines the legal governance of the scheme established under Ontario's Education Act for the provision of special education to mentally disabled pupils. The examination occurs within the context of the pedagogical debate over full inclusion. In particular, the use of equality rights constructs under provincial human rights legislation and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms in order to secure a legal right to full inclusion is critically examined.;The study begins by considering the development of the current special education scheme, its main provisions, and the underlying interests that it seeks to serve.;The study then considers full inclusion's use of equality rights discourse and discrimination analysis as vehicles to remedy the perceived flaws in the current scheme and to secure more inclusive education for mentally disabled pupils. It is concluded that the discrimination argument of full inclusion lacks a background theory of equality that sufficiently informs its use, and is inconsistent with established human rights jurisprudence in certain respects. Further, equality rights discourse entails some disturbing implications in the special education context. As well, the use of the discrimination complaint raises certain issues of process and institutional competence that to date have not received full consideration in the literature. Specifically, the human rights process is not the most appropriate forum in which to, in effect, assess the merits of special education programs. Thus, the equality rights argument employed by full inclusion is ultimately unconvincing and ineffective as a tool to secure enhanced inclusive education for the mentally disabled. (Abstract shortened by UMI.). |
