No / Regulatory bodies governing health professions and professional education set clear expectations regarding fitness to practise. Within the UK, the Equality Act, 2010, poses a challenge to regulators, educators and employers to ensure that people are not excluded on the basis of disability and to facilitate inclusion. This research took a mixed methods approach to exploring the tensions between Higher Education providers and placement providers in the health sector. Disabled and nondisabled students and health professionals engaged in semistructured interviews and a survey in order to explore their beliefs and experiences. The findings suggest that applying equality legislation within health settings may be particularly difficult and that ¿disability¿ is an ambiguous and multifaceted concept. Whilst small in scale, the findings have given a voice to a professional group who are underrepresented in research and have raised a number of important issues that merit discussion and further scrutiny.

This phenomenological study was designed and conducted in a Post 1992 ‘new university’ situated in the UK. The aims of the study were a) to investigate inclusive practice amongst disabled students in higher education, b) to explore students’ perceptions on their lived experiences of the support provided c) to explore disabled students’ experiences of the process in gaining support d) to identify the kind of practices disabled students used to support their own effective learning in HE. A sample of 14 students, aged 19 to 56 volunteered to participate in the study. The study was underpinned by inclusive theory and equality policy provided for higher education institutions. Rich data from phenomenological interviews was analysed using thematic and narrative analysis. Analysis of the data uncovered new knowledge for lecturers and support staff in understanding disabled students’ lived experiences as they approached support systems and classrooms in higher education. The key findings involved a) barriers to communication and collaboration between students and lecturers, b) attitudes of staff and the asymmetries of power experienced by students in accessing support, c) issues around student anxiety, dependence and independence and ownership of learning, d) the idea that a reasonable adjustment could be unreasonable and embarrassing and evidence of tokenism in supporting students. The recommendations included a) the need for more in-depth training for all staff in equality and inclusive practice and inclusive course design, b) more support for students in negotiating their Study Needs Assessment, c) bridging the communication gap between Student Wellbeing, lecturers and students. The changes in funding to the Disabled Students’ Allowance came into force during 2016 which has consequently reduced or removed support for students who have disclosed a disability. Due to such changes, it will be even more important for universities to support the training of students, lecturers and support staff in creating and maintaining more inclusive environments in the future.

Students diagnosed with long-term mental health conditions have been the focus of policy development for over a decade. Student mental health is on the increase and universities are legally obliged to make reasonable adjustments for disabled students. Therefore it is crucial that nursing and midwifery education provides an inclusive learning environment, while maintaining fitness to practice standards. The focus of this study was to explore how discourses of mental health, reasonable adjustments and fitness standards influence nursing and midwifery education for students with a mental health condition. Principles of Wodak’s (2001) critical discourse analysis approach, which gives prominence to dominant discourses, their justifications and persuasive nature was utilised. Ten key written texts and 23 semi-structured interviews with students, lecturers and clinical mentors were conducted to acquire the constructions of mental health, reasonable adjustments and fitness requirements. The findings show that the dominant discourses attributed to students experiencing mental ill health were around medicine, difference and blame, all of which reinforced mental health stigma. In addition, mental health discourses within both verbal and written texts were not underpinned by disability discourses, allowing the exclusion of students who disclose mental ill health from accessing reasonable adjustments. In conclusion, students considered to have a mental health label faced discriminatory barriers and legislative and regulatory requirements of equality were not implemented.

Students diagnosed with long-term mental health conditions have been the focus of policy development for over a decade. Student mental health is on the increase and universities are legally obliged to make reasonable adjustments for disabled students. Therefore it is crucial that nursing and midwifery education provides an inclusive learning environment, while maintaining fitness to practice standards. The focus of this study was to explore how discourses of mental health, reasonable adjustments and fitness standards influence nursing and midwifery education for students with a mental health condition. Principles of Wodak’s (2001) critical discourse analysis approach, which gives prominence to dominant discourses, their justifications and persuasive nature was utilised. Ten key written texts and 23 semi-structured interviews with students, lecturers and clinical mentors were conducted to acquire the constructions of mental health, reasonable adjustments and fitness requirements. The findings show that the dominant discourses attributed to students experiencing mental ill health were around medicine, difference and blame, all of which reinforced mental health stigma. In addition, mental health discourses within both verbal and written texts were not underpinned by disability discourses, allowing the exclusion of students who disclose mental ill health from accessing reasonable adjustments. In conclusion, students considered to have a mental health label faced discriminatory barriers and legislative and regulatory requirements of equality were not implemented.