Camila
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
Camila works overseas with her husband, employed by the same Australian organisation. They are required to learn the local language and reach a certain level of oral proficiency. Camila has attempted the test many times over the past four years but always falls short.
‘Other people started learning the language and passed the test within six months,’ Camila wrote to the Royal Commission. ‘Clearly something was wrong.’
No-one had ever suggested Camila was dyslexic, but she went for screening on a hunch. She discovered she has moderate dyslexia which affects her ability to process verbal information and communicate quickly using speech. Camila believes this also explains why she struggled so much at university and had to drop out.
‘I never had any support then or anyone suggesting that perhaps dyslexia could be a reason.’
The diagnosis has not helped Camila at work. ‘My superiors will not listen to alternatives … The language requirement is not a requirement of my job per se, but is just a requirement my organisation forces on everyone regardless of circumstances.’
Camila says her husband’s skill with the language covers for both of them. ‘I am still expected to keep learning the language and keep learning and keep learning until I can pass an oral test. My husband helped me write this because writing is difficult for me too.’
Camila would like employers to be more flexible when dealing with people with dyslexia.
‘I was told that I would be listened to and that I could find an alternative for language testing. However, when I found an alternative it was dismissed, despite it being completely valid. Basically, no-one has actually listened to me.’
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.