Not quite finished . . .

Auntie Beab says:

People with cancer, HIV and multiple sclerosis (MS) have new legal rights from today.

Such individuals are now protected by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) from the time of diagnosis.

It means that employers will not be able to sack someone because they have found out that they have one of the conditions.

People with mental health problems also have new rights - only some of whom enjoyed protection under the law.

I didn't hear about that coming. Aren't we supposed to have had a lot of upset about the nanny state when this sort of thing happens?

In other news . . .I was going to mention that in the pub on Friday I noticed a book on the side, called roughly The Best Quotations of Women. So far so good, you might think, except that when I picked it up it turned out to be an insultingly thin volume. Inside, most of the space was given over to pictures - and not even pictures of the women being quoted. So, a very nicely-put-together little tome, but perhaps falling down slightly in other respects. Many of the quotations themselves were very good, but perhaps a few more might have been nice.

In Neon last night, there was a pint on one of the tables which people seemed to reckon had been spiked. The signs arousing people's suspicions were subtle; the glass was half-full of beer and quarter-full of cream-coloured ovoid tablets.

It turned out that the tablets were trimethylglycine, sold allegedly to help avoid DNA damage.
*ahem* It's political correctness gone mad! Next we'll have gays marrying cancer!
I don't see this being much of a nanny state issue.
Its merely trying to prevent discrimination due to illness which doesn't necessarily affect a person's ability to do a job.
Of course, if a person can no longer do their job then it is grossly unfair to expect an employer to keep employing them, but I don't think the legislation is meant to have that effect.

I have difficulty seeing anyone calling that a nanny state issue except for extreme libertarians or anarchists of whom there are none in mainstream politics or media.
I was thinking more of the "increasing the burden of regulation on industry" crowd.
As in there being people for whom it's a concern and people for whom it's a mantra - these latter aren't necessarily particularly libertarian in general.
Anything like this that gives people with mental health problems more rights is fine by me. I know so many people who have been sacked due to long term mental illness. I'm facing those problems right now. I may just quit and get it over and done with. I really don't need anymore pressure.
What you said, in spades. I suffer from both clinical depression and migraine and anything that means employers can't legally discriminate against me for being ill because of these conditions is a huge step forward. I've just quit yet another job because of sanctions imposed because of my migraine.