Epilepsy has now emerged, I hope, from the outright prejudice and superstition that surrounded the condition within living memory, yet people with epilepsy continue to face barriers in employment.
Epilepsy Scotland has carried out research on epilepsy and employment, which I know the Minister for Just Transition, Employment and Fair Work, Richard Lochhead, has already taken an interest in, and on which he commented during his recent participation in the cross-party group on epilepsy. I welcome that interest, and I look forward to hearing the minister’s comments in summing up today.
People with epilepsy are very significantly less likely to be in employment than are the general population, so let me begin by mentioning a few relevant statistics. While the disability employment gap for people with disabilities in general is only slightly higher in Scotland than it is in the United Kingdom, the real differences lie at a local level. The gap ranges from barely 8 percent in some communities to 50 per cent in Na h-Eileanan an Iar, my own constituency. Rural areas appear to face particular challenges.
Only 36.9 per cent of people with epilepsy in the UK reported being in employment, compared with 81.3 per cent of non-disabled people. That represents an employment gap of 44.4 percentage points for people with epilepsy. In fact, the annual population survey for the UK shows that people with epilepsy are one of the least likely groups to report employment relative to all people with a disability of any kind.
Epilepsy Scotland is therefore seeking to challenge and support employers to overcome continuing mistaken assumptions. In case that sounds like a lecture to employers, I should say that I have no reason to believe that employers’ ideas about epilepsy are any more mistaken than those of the population at large. To lump all people with epilepsy together risks completely failing to understand their hugely differing needs and their unique talents.
A great proportion of people with epilepsy have the condition either entirely or virtually entirely controlled by medication—I fall into that category myself—and they may have lived completely free of seizures for many years. Yet it seems that some employers continue to view people with epilepsy as a risk—as being at risk of accidents, with presumed risk of litigation. In fact, as the research highlights, there is no evidence at all to show that people with epilepsy present any greater risk.
Perhaps the most concerning finding presented by the research is that there may be a psychological impact of the ignorance of others on some people with epilepsy themselves. In cases where people experience repeated rejection in the workforce, they sometimes develop a limited estimation of their own abilities.
I am personally very lucky, in that I have had fairly understanding employers. I once had a seizure towards the end of a job interview and still somehow managed to get the job. Looking back to another job—not in politics—I had a less positive experience. I had a seizure at work and I remember my employer complaining, as I recovered, that I was not compos mentis. I did not think of that as much more than a statement of the obvious, while I was groggily coming to. It only later became clear to me that he meant something else entirely: he thought that having a seizure was presumably only one symptom of many more to come of what he misunderstood epilepsy to be—namely, a psychiatric condition. I do not dismiss the possibility that I may not, more generally, always be compos mentis, but I hesitate to attribute that fact to any neurological cause. Public misunderstandings about epilepsy mean that some people have to contend with all the prejudices that surround mental illness when they do not even have a mental illness.
Since I indicated that I would bring the debate to the Parliament, I have heard from people who have encountered varying problems at work. One man who works in a supermarket told me that he does well in his job, which he has held for a number of years. The supermarket apparently forgot that he had a medical condition, although his epilepsy had been previously and formally drawn to the supermarket’s attention. As a result, it failed to take into account his epilepsy when he complained about bullying. He said that new team leaders in his store were not aware that he had a disability.
Such examples show that not all employers are even aware that staff members have epilepsy and far less do they make reasonable adjustments for staff because of that. As a result, people with epilepsy are often underemployed and working in low-skill jobs.
I have concentrated on some of the problems, but I hope that members from across the Parliament will also see the debate as a chance to outline positive ways forward. We could agree on, for instance, the need to improve the detail of the statistics that are available to us for measuring the problem and trying to get to the bottom of the reasons for the huge local variations.
Above all, we can commit to ensuring that a wider understanding of epilepsy permeates our schools, business organisations and colleges. We can highlight and support good practice where it exists. We should recognise that, as a country, we are not drawing to anything like the extent that we could on the talents of people with epilepsy. That means not only that people with epilepsy are missing out economically and socially but that our economy as a whole is missing out, too.
Many organisations across Scotland, such as Neuro Hebrides in my constituency, do great work in empowering people with epilepsy. I hope that the debate and the work that Epilepsy Scotland is doing will help to empower people with epilepsy in one very specific way—in workplaces across Scotland.
18:41