Unsichtbare Behinderungen in die Sichtbarkeit zwingen?
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
Unsichtbare Behinderungen in die Sichtbarkeit zwingen?
Das Legasthenie-Urteil des BVerfG
Zeitschrift für Lebensrecht, Vol. 33 (2024), Iss. 3–4 : pp. 185–206
Additional Information
Article Details
Pricing
Author Details
Isabel Lischewski, Lehrstuhl für Internationales Öffentliches Recht und Internationalen Menschenrechtsschutz Wilmergasse 28 48143 München, Deutschland
Abstract
The Federal Constitutional Court has ruled that the disclosure of a disability in a school report can be justified if the examinee’s spelling performance was not assessed due to a disability – in this case dyslexia. The article shows that the justified criticism of the decision, which has already been voiced in many places, does not go deep enough. Not only does the Senate, as many authors have already demonstrated, use arguments that fall far short of the state of jurisprudential debates on the concept of disability or the handling of Art. 3 para. 3 sentence 2 Basic Law. It also makes an erroneous assessment in the end: It assigns too much weight to the transparency of school reports because it does not consistently think of this in terms of the fundamental right to school education and, in contrast, fails to recognize the role of the “Notenschutz”, which, at least with regard to dyslexia, fulfills the function of compensating for disadvantages. The decision therefore fails to reduce the risks of disadvantage for pupils with disabilities when exercising their right to education and may even exacerbate them.
Table of Contents
| Section Title | Page | Action | Price |
|---|---|---|---|
| Isabel Lischewski: Unsichtbare Behinderungen in die Sichtbarkeit zwingen? Das Legasthenie-Urteil des BVerfG | 185 | ||
| Das Legasthenie-Urteil des BVerfG | 185 | ||
| I. Einführung | 185 | ||
| II. Das Urteil | 186 | ||
| III. Wesentliche Kritikpunkte der Literatur | 187 | ||
| 1. Begriff der Behinderung | 187 | ||
| 2. Ausspielen von Behinderungen gegeneinander | 189 | ||
| IV. Die fehlerhafte Abwägung | 190 | ||
| 1. Notenschutz als Nachteilsausgleich oder Bevorzugung? | 190 | ||
| 2. Zeugnistransparenz wiegt Art. 3 Abs. 2 S. 2 GG auf? | 195 | ||
| a) Schulzeugnisse und das Recht auf Bildung | 195 | ||
| b) Die Rolle von Rechtschreibung | 198 | ||
| V. Im Hintergrund: Die spezifische Diskriminierung unsichtbarer Behinderungen | 200 | ||
| VI. Fazit | 203 |