Denying Participation in After-School Programs and Charging Support Staff Costs to a Student with Autism Constitutes Discrimination
– Recommendation to Provide Support Measures, Including the Assignment of Educational Assistants for Students with Disabilities –
□ The National Human Rights Commission of Korea (NHRCK) recommended on February 5, 2025, that the principal and the chairperson of the school management committee of OOOO Elementary School prepare measures to ensure the participation of students with disabilities in after-school programs, including the assignment of educational support staff.
□ A student with autism (hereinafter, "the complainant") applied for an after-school horseback riding program (hereinafter, "the program") at OOOO Elementary School. However, the school principal (hereinafter, "the respondent") rejected the application, citing that the student has a severe disability and that the riding institution does not have a therapeutic riding instructor. When the student’s parent raised an objection, the respondent proposed an alternative—individual horseback riding lessons with an additional staff member (a side-walker)—but required the complainant to cover the cost of this arrangement. The student’s parent subsequently filed a complaint with the NHRCK, claiming that the student was treated unfavorably.
□ The respondent argued that, due to the student’s difficulty in communication and following instructions, the risk of an accident was high, and thus an individual class was necessary. The respondent also stated that after-school program fees are based on a full user-pay principle, and that the additional staffing costs should be borne by the student.
□ The NHRCK’s Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Chair: Standing Commissioner Nam Kyu-sun) found that the respondent did not make reasonable efforts to assess the student’s abilities, such as by giving them the opportunity to attempt horseback riding. Therefore, concerns about safety or the lack of a therapeutic riding instructor were not considered valid grounds for denying the student’s participation.
Additionally, the Committee noted that:
△ The program was originally designed to accommodate individual learning levels,
△ The riding facility had a designated track for students needing individual instruction, and
△ The school’s after-school programs aim not only to develop specific skills but also to promote interaction and mutual learning among students.
Based on these factors, the Committee concluded that separating the student from the group for the lesson was not justifiable.
The Committee further held that assigning an additional staff member to the student was a form of reasonable accommodation required under Article 14(1)(2) of the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities, as it is a necessary measure to ensure that the student can participate in the class on an equal basis with their peers. This type of support qualifies as an educational assistant, which schools are obligated to provide to prevent discrimination in educational activities.
Accordingly, the Commission found that:
△ Conducting the horseback riding class separately due to the student’s disability and the need for additional staff, and △ Charging the student for the cost of this support staff,
constituted discriminatory practices as prohibited by Articles 13(4) and 14(1)(2) of the Act on the Prohibition of Discrimination against Persons with Disabilities and Remedies Against Infringement of Their Rights.
□ The NHRCK therefore recommended that the principal and the chairperson of the school’s management committee establish measures to secure educational support staff and ensure the participation of students with disabilities when planning after-school programs.
