Accommodation Request Skill

Reasonable accommodations (US: ADA; UK: reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act; similar elsewhere) are a right, but getting them often stalls on how the request is framed: people over-share medical detail, ask for a vague "help," or frame it as a favor rather than an adjustment to a barrier. Employers and institutions respond best to a specific request that names the barrier and the adjustment that removes it — they generally don't need your diagnosis, only the functional limitation and what helps. This skill writes that request, guides how much to disclose, and prepares you for the interactive back-and-forth that follows. It is not legal advice; it routes to the formal process and to advocacy if you hit resistance.

What This Skill Produces

• A barriers-and-adjustments map: for each thing that's hard, the specific workplace/course barrier and the concrete adjustment that removes it (framed as an adjustment to a barrier, not a personal favor)
• The request letter/email: to the right person (HR, disability services, manager per the process), citing the process, naming the adjustments, and inviting the interactive dialogue
• Disclosure guidance: how much to share (usually the functional limitation and what helps, not the diagnosis), what you're not obliged to reveal, and where medical documentation is genuinely needed
• A process plan: the interactive/good-faith dialogue that's expected, how to handle "that's not possible," alternatives, and escalation to advocacy or the formal complaint route if needed

Required Inputs

Ask for (if not already provided):

• The setting (workplace or education) and country/system, since the legal framework and process differ
• The specific difficulties and the tasks/situations where they bite (the barrier), and what adjustments would help
• What the user is comfortable disclosing and to whom, and whether there's an existing process (HR policy, disability services office)
• Any history (a prior refusal, a difficult manager) that shapes strategy

Framework

1. Frame around barrier → adjustment, not diagnosis. The request names the barrier ("open-plan noise makes focused work impossible," "fixed exam timing conflicts with medication effects") and the specific adjustment that removes it (noise-cancelling/ a quiet space, extra time/a separate room). The employer's duty attaches to the barrier and the reasonable fix, not to your medical history.
2. Disclose the minimum that works. Generally you must share enough functional information to justify the adjustment and may need medical documentation of the limitation — but not your full diagnosis or records. The skill helps calibrate: enough to establish the need, no more, and names what you're not obliged to reveal.
3. Send it to the right process. Route to whoever owns adjustments (HR, disability/ access services, occupational health) rather than only a manager who can't approve, cite the relevant policy/law framing, and put it in writing so there's a record.
4. Expect the interactive dialogue — and engage it. These processes are meant to be a good-faith back-and-forth: they may propose alternatives, ask for documentation, or push back on cost/feasibility. The skill preps constructive responses, the "undue-hardship/reasonableness" conversation, and holding firm on the barrier while being flexible on the exact fix.
5. Know the escalation and get support. If met with refusal, delay, or retaliation: the formal grievance/complaint route, disability advocacy organizations, and (where warranted) legal advice. Retaliation for requesting accommodations is itself usually unlawful — flag it, and route to real help rather than adjudicating it here.

Output Format

## Barriers → adjustments
| The barrier (situation/task) | The adjustment that removes it |

## Your request (send this)
[To the right owner · cites the process · names the adjustments · invites the
interactive dialogue · in writing]

## What to disclose (and what you needn't)
[The functional info to share · documentation if genuinely needed · what you're not
obliged to reveal]

## The back-and-forth
[Expect a good-faith dialogue · handling "not possible"/alternatives · firm on barrier,
flexible on fix]

## If you hit a wall
[Grievance/complaint route · disability advocacy orgs · legal advice · retaliation is
usually unlawful — get help]

⚠ Not legal advice. Frameworks differ by country and situation; route to the formal
process and to an advocate/lawyer if you meet resistance.

Quality Checks

• Every request is framed as barrier → adjustment, not as a diagnosis disclosure or a favor
• Disclosure is calibrated to the minimum needed, and what's not required is stated
• It's routed to the actual owner of the process, in writing
• The interactive/good-faith dialogue is anticipated with constructive responses
• An escalation/advocacy path and the not-legal-advice line are present

Anti-Patterns

• Do not over-disclose medical detail — the barrier and the fix are what matter
• Do not assert specific legal entitlements or "undue hardship" thresholds as fact — they vary; route to the process and to advocacy
• Do not frame it as asking a favor — it's a request to remove a barrier, often a legal duty
• Do not counsel giving up at first refusal — the interactive process and escalation exist for exactly that
• Do not treat retaliation as normal — flag it and route to real help

Related

[[disability-disclosure-decision]] for the whether/how of telling work at all; [[disability-benefit-appeal]] for the benefits side; [[venue-access-check]] and [[accessible-travel-planner]] for physical access; [[nt-translator]] for the workplace- communication layer.