Omg it's like exactly the same as Tristan's case!

What disability does she have?

depression i expect

Why is it your business to know?

OK, I've tried to post this once already, but Live! appears to be broken.

• --

After reading a three-paragraph article which mentions an unspecified disability three times (twice in consecutive sentences, no less), I can't blame Random for being at least a little curious. Particularly in a society where naughty children are now labelled as having "behavioural disorders", leaving words like "disability" being so all-encompassing as to be meaningless.

I would agree there is a certain right to privacy, but reading a linked article I see that Huseman refused to elaborate when previously citing her disability as a reason for absence. Then privacy and decency meet accountability, like a chav crying human rights when arrested.

From the way this piece is written, I believe there is a hint of scepticism.

sad to see that american girl go.

"refused to elaborate"

I would assume that she wanted people to focus on who she was, rather than what slows her down. You can't blame her for that.

Yes, a line does need to be drawn somewhere, but I think it's a crying shame that she's had to leave. From an outsiders point of view, she needs help, not firing. It's a shame that ULU could not provide it.

What did she so (or not do?) which lead to her to be no-confidenced?

I don't really understand - (I imagine) she would spend most of her time either in an office, in meetings or on the telephone? What disability would prevent her from doing this?

People who have a disability should be given the same chances as everyone else, but it's not an excuse to underperform.

I must admit that I've interchanged the words disability with chronic medical condition.

Do that then there are a few things that could easily prevent you from being in every day.

No, they needn't be obvious either.

This is too close to home, I'm out of the discussion.

I went to ULU once and saw her incompetence first hand. Steve was totally right to bring the no-confidence and she's just played the disability card as a completely unfounded reason just to escape.

I've been here before?

She has 's**ty pants' diseas, aka Iritiable bowel syndrome, which apparently measn she ahs to take litteraly months off of work. She is jsut using the disabiity lark to try nd distract from the fact she attend 5 days of work since janurary 1st 2008 and has done absoultely nothing for the students she represents except of course to get them to pay for her visa.

speaking of which, can we get a refund on that?

apols for the truely dreadful spelling, but the terrible truth is I too have a disability: im a lazy typer and often mispell words. it's a condition, people, and i'd like you to respect my differences whil allowing me to draw full pay for a year

I suspect the reason that we see sabbatical resignations year on year is because the people we elect can't hack what's going on there. I'm not actually meaning this as a personal attack on them. The simple truth is that ULU has, by means of years of management pushing around weak sabbs and the whole thing being run entirely as a business (and badly as a business, too), simply lost its relevance. It no longer means *anything*.

In fact, all we get out of it is London Student, and the paper's not had a particularly notable year under editor Elinor Zuke. Not necessarily all her fault or that of the team - LS relies on ULU functioning on some level so that it can make a decent paper without having to expend all of its effort not getting cut back and axed in as ULU continues to fall apart.

From my experience, anyone who tries to do anything at ULU just gets screwed over or dies of frustration. I've seen several sabbs have nervous breakdowns, mainly because management/UL have been being gratuitously obstructive.

It doesn't help that we all spent years electing (mainly) idiots to run ULU. Now, it doesn't matter who we choose, because:

1) They don't have any ability to do anything.

2) The elections have reached such a low ebb in terms of candidates and turnout that there's usually just the one person running anyway, if that.

When I first entered ULU, it was already in a mess, but there were the elements of an SU there and a fightback would have been possible. It just never happened, and I don't believe it can. Which is a shame, because that HLM card isn't going to be any use when there's no Union.

I haven't spoken to Huseman and I don't know the details of her reasons. Be it her illness/disability in truth, or actually because she can't see the point, resignation is probably the most sensible thing to do at ULU. I have spent years arguing otherwise, but the funding cuts and what got cut show how pointless it is now.

UL could have been more effective in intervening by stripping out its commercial side (which isn't viable anyway) and spending less money but on student-facing stuff. Instead, they sliced all the good bits to pieces while they were at it. They just never wanted to.

I wouldn't say London Student hasn't been notable - the paper's just been shortlisted as Students' Union Publication of the Year in the NUS awards.