Graphic is of a chart that describes seven principles of Universal Design. There are eight circles, the middle circle states Universal Design Principles. It is surrounded by seven circles that are attached to the middle circle by a line. The circles state the seven principles – Equitable, Flexible, Simple and Intuitive, Perceptible, Tolerance for Error, Low Physical Effort and Physical Accessibility.
Access, now there is a word. I preach it a lot, but I do not always practice it. I really need to improve. Often, for example, I publish Rebuttal’s without an Auslan version. My only excuse is time and impatience. I really need to improve. That also includes me providing descriptive text for any graphics I use. At the end of each paragraph that I type in this article I will stop and translate it to Auslan. Hopefully, in this way I can publish an accessible article, even if my Auslan is a bit crappy.
Why this article? Well, I am witnessing many incidences around lack of phone access for people who are Deaf and hard of hearing from organisations that really should know better. Yesterday a friend posted on Facebook about being contacted by Hearing Australia. As they do, they call by voice to a Deaf or hard of hearing person’s phone to remind them of appointments. If no response, they send a follow up text message asking the receiver to call them to schedule their appointment.
I find the Hearing Australian phone communication system really frustrating. People who are Deaf and hard of hearing can call through the Relay Service or Convo, but why should they? They should have options to text, email or even text chat. Hearing Australia need to do better.
It will surprise no one that one of the worst for phone access for people who are Deaf and hard of hearing is the NDIS. Whether it is a person waiting for contact about their new plan or a person who is going through a review. The NDIS will call them. At first, they will receive a text message saying that the NDIS will call them within 15 minutes and to please answer. You can’t even respond to the message because it is a private number.
What can the person who is Deaf or hard of hearing do? They can’t text, they can’t email, they are stuck. So, the NDIS calls and the person who is Deaf or hard of hearing cannot answer. It is appalling. What is worse is if the person cannot make contact, after three calls the NDIS apparently marks them as non-responsive. Countless people who are Deaf or hard of hearing receive these messages every day and are extremely frustrated. The NDIS have to do better than this.
There are other organistions besides these two that are equally culpable when it comes to phone access. Hospitals, banks, Government departments and so on. However, I have highlighted Hearing Australia and the NDIS because firstly, Hearing Australia are Australia’s oldest and largest service provider for audiology. Secondly, the NDIS are Australia’s largest disability support system with over 700 000 participants on their books. You would think that these two major organisations would be setting an example about what constitutes good access. It is mind boggling that they are so bad.
This is why I encourage people to think universal. I am referring here to Universal Design. It is a simple concept where people think about all of the people that might access a service or structure like a building. You build a building so that parents in prams can access the building through a ramp which in turn provides access for wheelchair users. You have adequate lighting for people that require good lighting but at the same time lighting that will allow access for people who may have sensorineural issues.
Alarm systems are both auditory and visual. Information boards can be in text, audio and provide Auslan translations for things like evacuations and safety. The very concept of Universal Design is that designers of services and infrastructure consider as many scenarios as they possibly can, at the start and not as an afterthought later. They might not be able to cover everything, but Universal Design is a hell of a lot more financially sensible than adding things later after everything is fully rolled out and established.
I think as a minimum, organisations such as Hearing Australia and the NDIS need to be showing how it is done. They have no excuse for being “hearingcentic”. As Australia’s biggest providers of services and supports for people who are Deaf, hard of hearing and who have disabilities they need to be setting an example and demonstrating what accessible supports are.
Dear all in the NDIA, (Especially Planners and NDIA decision makers)
Hello, my name is Gary Kerridge. I am a retired disability advocate. I comment regularly on the current situation with the NDIS and how it is impacting on people with a disability. Sometimes I am angry and a little controversial. Today, I am reaching out in the spirit of educating and informing.
Although I am experienced across the disability spectrum, my specialty is deafness. I have advocated and supported many Deaf and hard of hearing people with their applications to the NDIS, their reviews and even their appeals to tribunals. Some of these have had positive outcomes, some less so. Of late the negative outcomes for people who are Deaf and hard of hearing have become more frequent. This has aligned with the changes that have been rolled out that have the goal of making the NDIS sustainable.
In the last week, although I am retired, a few people have reached out to me.They are not all participants. Some of them are actually service providers. There seems to be a clear pattern where the NDIA is targeting Auslan interpreting to reduce expenditure in this area.
Allow me to explain and provide you with some recent examples.
Example A:
I have been supporting a participant with their application to the NDIS. They received a plan whereby only $300 was provided for 12 months of Auslan interpreting. Around $4000 or so was provided for assessments for things like hearing aids and technology.
Of course, the Auslan interpreting budget was totally inadequate. The participant is an Auslan user. They are very active in both the hearing and Deaf community. Auslan interpreting was crucial for their community participation. Their needs include private medical appointments, attending hearing functions such as parties/weddings/funerals and to allow the participant to participate in small community based learning like arts and crafts. They also wish to participate in amateur theatre, which is a great passion of theirs.
The plan was reviewed. Extra interpreting funding was provided. But it was still totally inadequate and was only an extra $1300. Around 80 hours of interpreting was requested. This is not excessive. In fact in my time working in the NDIS sector, a standard 72 hours per year was usually provided unless the participant could demonstrate a greater need.
The participant was very disillusioned by this time. After review the only course for them to take was an AAT appeal. They declined, feeling that the stress and time needed to gather all the evidence that would be required was too great. Indeed, by this time they were extremely distressed as they had already submitted comprehensive evidence of their need.
Fast forward a few months. The participant has progressed assessments and quotes to obtain new hearing aids. This week they received a call from the NDIA to inform them that the hearing aids were approved. This is good news, but what is interesting is what the NDIA planner divulged to the participant.
The planner phoned, even though notes on system say to email. Luckily the participant was able to answer and use captions on their phone to communicate with the Planner. The Planner had this to say, “We have prioritised hearing aid funding in lieu of interpreting as it is a lower cost alternative to providing access.” In the interest of fairness, it should be mentioned that the participant commented that the Planner was extremely helpful and empathetic of their needs. This is fantastic to hear.
Naturally, the participant was shocked at what the Planner divulged. What it showed was that the NDIA decision maker for the participants plan did not have a good grasp of the limits that many deaf people have in regard to aided hearing. This is despite provision of a comprehensive report where evidence was presented of speech perception tests and how this would impact in various communication settings that the participant was likely to experience.
The Planner went on to suggest that the evidence provided was insufficient. This suggests that NDIA personnel involved had either not read the report in detail or possibly that they had not understood it’s contents.
This leads to Example B.
Example B
This week I was contacted by a person that provides Auslan interpreting. The person wanted to know if I had any documentation as to why there is a two hour minimum booking for interpreters. I was able to provide them with a link to an article that explains why there is the two hour minimum. The basis of this minimum is that most interpreters are freelance. They have to travel between jobs. They need to catch public transport to various areas, pay for parking and so on.
What this means is that when they are travelling or seeking/paying for parking etc they are not earning an income. So, for example, if they had a job that was thirty minutes and charged only the thirty minutes for the job, then traveled an hour to the next job they are disadvantaged because travel between jobs is a big part of interpreting. When traveling interpreters are not earning.
To cut a long story short, without the two hour minimum, many interpreters would not be able to make a livable income and would not be able to stay in the industry. If this was the case, the Deaf community would be severely disadvantaged. Already there is a shortage of interpreters. Without the two hour minimum charge this would be even worse because many interpreters would not be able to make a living in the industry.
You can read more about the need for the two hour minimum by clicking this LINK
The person who contacted me was asking me this because they were trying to explain to the NDIA, with evidence, why there is a two hour minimum. They explained to me that Deaf participants are being told to rely more on their hearing aids and just use interpreters sporadically and for as short a time as possible.
The reality is that for nearly every booking, the minimum charged will be 2 hours. The consequence of the advice being provided by some NDIA delegates is that Deaf participants are increasingly being denied access to the community, its service and activities. Such access is a major goal of the NDIS. We should not forget the real distress that such drastic cuts to interpreting budgets is causing.
Further, the person that contacted me stated that there has been a massive drop in work since the NDIA has started to cut plans. This has meant that some interpreters have had to drop out of the industry and seek other work. The income that they are getting does not allow them to meet the cost of living. This is a real concern as there is already an enormous shortage of Auslan interpreters.
These examples show, again, that many Planners and NDIA decision makers are not knowledgeable about the needs of Deaf participants. It shows that they do not understand the real challenges that Deaf participants face in accessing interpreters. Nor do they understand reasons for the two hour minimum booking. Indeed many Planners and NDIA decision makers would appear to not even understand that this condition exists.
Example C:
Recently a friend who works as an allied health professional made an observation about how they were feeling in the NDIS space. They had this to say:
” ..It’s so bad atm – I’m not enjoying working as an Deaf OT in the NDIS space for our Deaf Community as there’s just so many funding cuts and knock backs despite the evidence provided. Working so so hard with not much reward.“
I have spoken to quite a few allied health professionals over the last few months and this is a common theme. Namely that they are providing comprehensive reports and evidence, but a lot of it is rejected or ignored. They feel that their experience and expertise is being dismissed to the participants detriment.
What does this mean? Well, many of professionals are considering dropping out of the industry. Indeed, if you look at example two, where my interpreter colleague has mentioned that interpreters are seeking other employment because NDIS cuts have meant that they are not getting enough work, this could be suggesting a trend.
This might be indicate that a large pool of experienced service providers are leaving or considering leaving the NDIS space. This is potentially catastrophic as there are already huge waiting lists and struggles to meet demands for support. For the Deaf community to lose interpreters in an area that is already struggling to meet demand across a range of needs, it is very scary.
Although my focus has been on participants who are Deaf and hard of hearing many of the themes that have been raised in this piece are possibly relevant across the NDIS space. For example:
The cuts to plans are causing great distress to participants. Some times unfairly.
The changes to the NDIS that have been suggested have the intent of sustainability of the scheme. While this is commendable, it would seem many of the changes are occurring before alternate supports, such as Foundation supports are ready.
It is impossible for Planners and NDIS delegates to have an in-depth knowledge of every disability. Some of the Decisions in the Deaf and hard of hearing space suggest Planners and NDIA decision makers are showing an unrealistic expectation of what aided hearing can achieve for many Deaf and hard of hearing participants. The lack of knowledge of specific disabilities is also likely impacting on their decision making across the disability spectrum.
The poor decision making, while aiming to cut costs, is actually costing more. It is leading to higher administrative demands and ultimately to appeals which are drawn out and have high legal costs. It also comes at great personal cost and distress to participants that the decisions are impacting.
I am under no illusions that for the NDIS to remain sustainable, changes need to be made. I am also aware that sometimes the suggested cuts to plans are justifiable. I believe that the examples I have provided are common across the NDIS space. I believe that the cuts to plans that are being made are often based on flawed reasoning, while at the same time ignoring expert advice and evidence that has been provided at great cost.
I fear that if we do not address some of the issues that I have raised, there will be a crisis. I fear that skilled providers will leave the NDIS space meaning that demand for supports, already difficult to meet, will not be met. I fear that the constant reviews and appeals will continue to siphon funds away from where they are better spent, and that is to provide much needed support to participants.
Many, many people have worked to try and find solutions to the problems of the NDIS. I do not pretend to know all the answers. What I do know is that in my time working in the NDIS space there was a pool of subject matter experts.
As a Planner I often consulted with them. I did this because I knew my limitations. For example, if home modifications were needed I would contact the subject matter expert within the NDIA who was knowledgeable about they types of modifications that could benefit a specific disability. I could contact them about specifications and legal requirements for the construction of ramps. I would ask for lay persons explanations of technical aspects of prosthetic fittings. I would use this information in my decision making process. It was just good practice.
It seems to me that this important part of the decision making process is now less common. How else can we explain that decisions to cut Auslan interpreting are being made because hearing aids are seen as a cheaper alternative, despite the provision of comprehensive reports and evidence?
I firmly believe that he NDIA needs to look closely at how decisions are being made and utilise the expertise it has within, and I know that there is a lot. Cutting costs is important for the sustainability of the NDIS, but it cannot happen on the basis of poor knowledge and process. It is this that will make the scheme unsustainable, far more than any monetary expense.
This Christmas will be the first Christmas where I am retired. After Xmas, I will be going to England and Scotland with Marnie. We are spoiling ourselves this year. We are even staying at a castle near Ben Nevis. I’m at loss as to what to put on my Xmas list. Maybe there are a couple of things that I would like to see. Not material things; just things that I think would be nice to see happen.
Us oldies will remember the time when Deaf Societies were the hub of the Deaf community. When the Australian Deaf Games were on for example, participants would meet at the Deaf Society and finalise their registrations. At night time the Deaf Club would be humming.
I remember rocking up at Newmarket Deaf Club in 1988 and finding out the Games were on. I registered on the spot and got roped into playing in goal for Victoria Deaf Soccer Team (I was living in SA at the time.) Rego was 80 bucks or something and you could play whatever sport you wanted. It included the closing dinner as well. There is no question; each State Deaf Society and the Deaf Club were the hub of the Deaf community. Those days are long gone.
This leads me to number 1 on my Xmas list; that the Deaf community can once again experience the joy of a Deaf club of their own. A hub that is theirs and an institution that they can be proud of. Wishful thinking perhaps, but this is a wish list after all.
Recently I was at the Old Bluestone building in St Kilda. This historical old building housed the original Victorian School for Deaf Children. A Deaf man, FJ Rose, founded the school in 1860 and was the first Headmaster of the school. He set the school up after reading in the Argus newspaper of a mother who had a Deaf daughter and did not want to have to send her daughter to England for her education. Such a fantastic history.
I was privileged to have worked there. What I loved most about working at this grand old building was the relationship we had with the Victorian College of the Deaf next door. VSCD Inc. provided services to deaf kids and families, many from the school. At lunch I would mingle in the school staff room with the teachers. I would play soccer on the oval with the kids. I loved it. (VSDC Inc. was the then branding for what is now known as Deaf Children Australia).
The kids would bring the old Bluestone Building to life. They had home economics classes there and a recreation room with table tennis tables upstairs. I would chat with the kids in the hallway and wave hello to them in the yard in the morning. It was one of the happiest times I can remember in my career.
So there I stood in front of the old Bluestone Building. Its huge doors were closed. It was very foreboding. There is a sign on the door saying “By appointment only.” Another sign instructs delivery people not to leave packages at the door but to call a phone number so that someone can come and get the packages. It looked sad and forlorn. There was not a deaf child to be seen. I reflected on my joyous time working there and wondered how it had come to this.
I commented on this once before a couple of years ago. I described how unwelcoming the big doors closed were and took a photo. I compared this to the vibrancy and atmosphere of the Tradeblock cafe run by the Victorian College of the Deaf. I posted my thoughts on Facebook.
It didn’t go down well. In fact, the CEO of Deaf Children Australia actually contacted my boss to complain. Well, I am retired now and don’t have a boss so if he wants to complain about this article I guess he will have to come to me. Failing that, I hope he has a stiff drink at hand or at least someone that can give him a cuddle.
But I jest. I realise that there are many reasons the doors are closed and children are no longer free to roam. Fears for their safety and strict rules about who can interact with the children are part of the reason. But still I yearn for the days of yonder when everything was so friendly and interactive.
This brings me to number two on my Xmas list. I would love to see that old community spirit that I experienced restored at the hallowed grounds of the Bluestone Building. It would be great to restore the camaraderie and community spirit where the kids could be exposed to Deaf adults and mentors. A spirit that FJ Rose would be proud of.
In retirement, I have had time to reflect on my long career. I worked at Deaf Societies across Australia in South Australia, NSW and Victoria. I was also fortunate to work for both Expression Australia and Deaf Connect. Both are wonderful organisations in their own right.
When I began my career, there was an Association of Deaf Societies. Deaf Societies across Australia would work on and support important issues like the National Relay Service. Every couple of years they would plan the Deafness Conference hosted by a different state. People may not agree with me, but I think back then the spirit of cooperation was high.
I guess what the NDIS has done is that it has led to an environment where our Deaf organisations aggressively market themselves to survive, as they must. It has led to our Deaf organisations becoming extremely territorial and defensive of their domain. That old spirit of cooperation that I witnessed all those years ago seems to have been replaced by mistrust and a fierce protective response to territory and markets. I think that is very sad.
Which brings me to my final Xmas wish. This wish is that our Deaf organisations can find it in themselves to rediscover that strong spirit of cooperation that they had in the past. Where they can find common ground rather than differences. Where they can work together on important issues that are relevant to the Deaf community. Is that too much to wish for?
Yeah, maybe I am just old and it’s just as well that I have retired. That said, I sincerely hope that our Deaf organisations can once again find that spirit of cooperation and trust again. Most of all I hope that Community Hub, those Deaf clubs and that brilliant community spirit that I was fortunate to experience, can be restored to its former glory.
Merry Xmas everyone. And if you don’t celebrate Xmas, have a fantastic break!
*** With respect for the challenges that our Deaf organisations must confront today. I am under no illusions as to how difficult that it is to survive.
Bill Shorten is blowing his own trumpet. Mr Shorten is, of course, the Minister for the NDIS. Since Labor got back in power Shorten has been hellbent on making the NDIS sustainable. His focus has mostly been on fraud and people that abuse the NDIS. He has been targeting shonky service providers. To be fair, he has been quite successful with this. Recently they publicly listed service providers who have been fined and 126 providers who have been banned altogether. It needed to be done.
Now, I am highly critical of Mr Shorten’s approach. Not because I think it’s necessarily wrong, but rather because I think his approach is an easy way to seem like he is doing something about making the NDIS sustainable. It looks good when can scream that $1 billion has been saved by targeting fraud. Well done on that I say. Where I am critical is that seems to be all Mr Shorten focuses on and he is neglecting many other key issues.
For mine, one of the biggest wastes that happens in the NDIS occurs because many delegates and planners are ill equipped for the complex job that they are tasked with. I know from working within the sector that there are many great LACs and many good delegates. But far too many, to be totally blunt, don’t know what they’re doing.
How else can you explain that my wife, an Auslan user who actively participates in the community through sport and theatre, got just $300 for Auslan interpreting for a year. It was her first plan after waiting almost 12 months for her access to be granted. On appeal she got another $1300. So bad was it that a friend had to offer some of their NDIS interpreting budget so that she could participate in activities.
She, like thousands upon thousands of NDIS participants, has had to review and now go to the Tribunal. What this costs the NDIS in legal fees, administrative costs is in the many millions of dollars. Not to mention the trauma and stress this is causing so many participants that cannot be calculated in monetary terms. It is a disgrace!
My wife’s budget, to cover private medical and social needs, would have covered about six bookings. This is given that interpreting bookings are a 2 hour minimum. Yet, some bright spark in the NDIS has deemed that this is totally adequate. Now, before anyone asks; yes she provided comprehensive reports and evidence. I don’t think the delegate or the LAC even bothered to read them.
You do not hear Shorten talking about this. Instead these many, many participants who are receiving inadequate and poorly thought out plans are being gaslit. So people like my wife, and there are thousands of them, are “At the heart of the NDIS” says Shorten. “Ensuring sustainability was never about cutting participants plans.”, he claims. These are direct quotes from Shorten in a recent Linkedin post. (Let’s not forget that he also calls disability activists who challenge and oppose him, “EXTREMISTS”)
Well Sally would beg to differ. (Not her real name.) Sally had her access to the NDIS approved in 2018. She was assisted by an organisation to apply. Sally has very complex needs. It seems, and she is unsure of this, that her original access to the NDIS was granted because she has a psychosocial disability.
But Sally has many different needs around her disabilities. She has mobility issues. These mobility issues are the result of many complex health issues and are permanent. She requires aids such as a wheelchair and other assistive technology to be able to live independently.
To access the community she requires support workers. To maintain her home she requires support workers as well. Her psychosocial disabilities compound the issues. Depression and extreme anxiety means, at its worse, that she struggles to confront and complete everyday tasks. Capacity building and support workers were integral parts of her plan to address the psychosocial issues as well as the mobility and physical ones.
And you know what? I reckon you could call Sally an NDIS success story. Since 2018 the NDIS assisted her to develop more confidence and address her depression and anxiety. The support workers assisted her to develop skills and confidence. The ability to access the community with support and aids improved her over all mental well being. These are all reasons that the NDIS was established.
Then disaster struck. The NDIS revoked her access. They told her that she no longer qualified for the NDIS and support was withdrawn. She appealed and submitted comprehensive reports of her needs and disabilities, all to now avail. Sally is now trying the Tribunal, this will be a long and drawn out process with no guarantee that her supports will be reinstated.
As I write this I have to stop and breathe. I hold my head in my hands. I try to make sense as to why Sally’s support has been removed. The reason given for removing her access is that she has not explored all treatments.
Apparently, after six years of support that has achieved enormous gains for Sally, her needs are “medical” and there are “treatments” available which are not NDIS responsibilities. It’s all in her head you see, everything including her physical disabilities. Sadly, the trauma that Sally has experienced has seen her regress. Her mental health is shot. The future remains uncertain and she currently has minimal support.
No plans have been cut? What bollocks Mr Shorten. People like Sally are being kicked off the scheme. Your “TRUMPET BLOWING” is gaslighting at its worst. Just ask my mate Dan who recently had his plan cut by over $50 000. In fact a recent article in The Saturday Paper titled, NDIS Crackdown Wrongly Withdraws Support outlines how many people are being unfairly removed from the NDIS and given only 28 days to demonstrate why they should remain on the scheme. It is disgusting.
Well done Mr Shorten on tackling the fraud. Now what are you going to do about the rest of it? How are Navigators and foundation supports going to help? Indeed, what will Navigators and foundation supports even look like? We all don’t know. The disability community and their associates are being severely impacted by NDIS decisions and uncertainty, please listen to their stories.
While at a Deaf soccer presentation last week a person came up to me and said something along the lines of, ” It’s you??? I love The Rebuttal, I read your articles all the time. I feel like I know you personally.” A little bit later this same person came up to me and asked if I would still keep writing The Rebuttal as I head into retirement. Said she, ” ….. I read them while I am on the toilet.” I thanked her for this endearing and lasting vision.
Getting comments like that never gets old. It really gives me a buzz. Four of us came up with The Rebuttal concept in 2006. We basically thought that the grassroots Deaf community were being largely ignored. There were a group of “Elites” that were controlling the agenda. We saw The Rebuttal as a way of challenging these Elites and, hopefully, as a way to give a bigger voice to the grassroots Deaf community.
That was 627 articles ago. Consider this, our very first article was bemoaning the lack of Deaf/HoH people in management positions. We pointed out that Deaf Society’s needed to use Affirmative Action to provide management opportunities to Deaf people. I remember arguing at the time that one of the current hearing CEOs got the job at 28 years of age with only a qualification in Youth Work.
It was time, we said, to promote Deaf/HoH into these roles because expecting them to win just on merit was unfair given the advantages and privileges that hearing people have. Well, with both our major Deaf organisations having Deaf CEOs now, and many Deaf people in management roles, we can all be well pleased with the current status quo.
Over the years The Rebuttal evolved. It was not just Deaf focused but commented on disability issues in general. At The Rebuttal’s heart Deaf/HoH issues were still the main focus. I guess we just became a little bit more worldly. That said, The Rebuttal was, and is, still mostly about Deaf/HoH issues. We are proud of that.
My favourite articles of The Rebuttal are the ones with characters portraying the Deaf/HoH experience. My favourite will always be Carrie, the little Deaf girl and the story of how she was often isolated within her hearing family. The idea was not to be critical of hearing people, rather just to show that Deafness is not just about the ears. The article also highlighted just how much of the responsibilities that mothers often bear. If you want to read this article, click here CARRIE
I guess the articles that people will remember most are the articles that challenged and raised issues. The Rebuttal was extremely outspoken about the loss of the South Australian Deaf community home at 262. When the partnership with Townsend House was first suggested around 2008, members of the Deaf community sent us copies of the suggested business agreement.
We warned then that the control of 262 was basically with Townsend House and that they could basically do what they liked with 262. Including selling it, which they did five years later. We received a lot of abuse from certain high-ranking people for stating the obvious. We were fearmongering they said. Well look what happened!
I still think the way the South Australia Deaf community were treated during this whole sorry saga was a disgrace. They ripped the guts out of this proud community and sold 262. An asset that was largely built by the Deaf community members through fundraising and hard labour. In 2021 Townsend House did eventually apologise for the way that they treated the Deaf community, but by then the damage was done.
We also sometimes challenged our advocacy organisations, much to their disgust. Deafness Forum actually blocked us from posting anything at their Facebook page. A certain someone also accused us of being solely responsible for the demise of Deaf Australia. (Who are still going strong, by the way, with a wonderful and vibrant young CEO)
Did we get it right all the time? No! sometimes we even publicly apologised if we got our facts wrong. It’s fair to say some noses were put out of joint. We make no apologies, challenge and debate are healthy. We copped abuse too. My wife was actually publicly told to “SHUT UP” for speaking out about Craptiview. My favourite was when a CEO sent Marnie an email asking her to tell me to back off. Why they couldn’t email me directly, I am not sure. It’s fair to say there was a bit of rough and tumble along the way.
I like to think we tried to be diverse as well. The Rebuttal was not just about politics and advocacy. We had a series where we highlighted quiet achievers in the Deaf/HoH sector such as the late Michael Lockrey and the brilliant Nancy Gibb. We wrote about the experience that Deaf people had during Covid in Pete’s Day. We picked up on new issues like the impact of Artificial Intelligence in The Rise and Rise of Artificial Intelligence. And we even wrote about Being Turned On, Sex and the Deaf, With Hearing People. We certainly were not a one trick pony.
But mostly, I like to think The Rebuttal and all of its contributors showed that they had a Deaf heart. Through all of it all the aim was to bring attention to the issues, needs and even the quirkiness of Deaf/HoH community. It was a great privilege to do this. I have loved every moment of it, particularly the responses of the readers. The responses made it all the more worthwhile.
So, to the question of our toilet reading admirer – Will I keep writing The Rebuttal in my retirement? I won’t say never, but I fully intend to switch off for a while. I fully intend to not let the cock up that is the current NDIS and other issues get me wound up. It’s time to just relax and enjoy some the finer things in life. BUT- The Rebuttal remains open to anyone that wants to contribute. We are more than happy, as we have in the past, to print the contributions of others, so feel free to use the platform if it will help.
Thanks all. It’s been a blast. Now it is time for me to recharge. Who knows what the future holds!
As a footnote, all articles focusing on and critical of the NDIS and Government programs can be solely attributed to me, Gary Kerridge. No other person has been involved or offered advise or information. Any names mentioned within or within the translation, are no longer involved in producing the Rebuttal, apart from Marnie who offers her translation skills from time to time. 😊
People who read The Rebuttal regularly will be aware that I once worked in the NDIS area. I first worked as a Senior Local Area Coordinator, or SLAC for short. I then worked for a time as a Senior Planner within the NDIA. For a brief time I also worked as a Support Coordinator. From this experience, I know the NDIS very well.
I worked within the NDIS until 2019. When I left, I often had people contact me for help with their NDIS. These people were from all over Australia, Northern Territory, Brisbane, Sydney, Newcastle, Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne – Everywhere.
Many of them needed assistance to review their first plan which was often crap. Sometimes they had a change of circumstances and needed to change their plan and get extra funding. Sometimes parents would contact me because the NDIS had refused Auslan in their child’s plan. Sometimes I was even asked to support people that the NDIS would not change decisions for at AAT, or court level. This was always hard with lawyers involved, the need for witness, extra evidence etc.
The first person I assisted received a first plan of just $1500. She was besides herself and in tears. We complained and put in a review and she received 75 hours of interpreting. Another person had a change of circumstances where their health was impacted. They didn’t have enough interpreting for private allied health treatments. They only had about 40 hours. We got that increased to 310 hours. I assisted a couple of parents get better plans that included Auslan for their kids. It varied.
The NDIS in the past made mistakes. Heaps of them. But what I found was that if you put in a good review, they could be flexible and would change their decisions and add extra support. Not always, mind you. But it seems to me that in the past they were more responsive and willing to make changes if the evidence suggested that it was warranted. This all seems to have changed now.
My wife applied for the NDIS. She submitted her application and evidence and should have been notified as to whether she had NDIS access within 21 days. It took them almost six months.
Upon getting access she was allocated a LAC to gather her information. Another long and drawn out saga. She provided all the evidence. Explained her needs around Auslan interpreting for community access and her need for new hearing aids. And waited.
Eventually she got her first plan. It had no interpreting funding. It had almost $6000 for assessments for low cost technology and hearing aids. It had just $300 to purchase low cost technology. She reviewed and received a new plan which offered just $1300 a year extra for interpreting. She was very upset and is currently preparing for an AAT appeal which is her only remaining outlet to have these ridiculous decisions overturned.
Another friend, after years of avoiding applying for the NDIS, finally applied. He submitted all of his evidence, audiograms etc. He has been profoundly deaf since birth. He was denied access to the NDIS. He was told he had not explored all treatment avenues, whatever that means. Perhaps the Doctor has some miracle cure to fix him. Perhaps through allied health he will learn to hear again and speak better. Who knows what the NDIS were thinking when they made this decision. It is absurd.
Another recently contacted me because her adult daughter had received an atrocious plan. The daughter has become more deaf over time. She is very isolated. Her mental health has been impacted as a result. She has been denied any assistance for the deafness related mental health needs and provided with no communication access. She asked for live captioning to access doctor and community events. She was told she didn’t need captioning because she could get a media streaming device for her hearing aids that would eliminate the need for any captioning. Let that sink in.
The final example is my favourite, if you can call it that. A woman was told that over the course of her three year plan, they would reduce Auslan interpreting. Why? Because by the third year she should have developed enough skills to be able to communicate independently. She is some how gonna hear better or become an awesome lipreader by the third year. It is bizarre!
What is going on here? I have a theory that the NDIS has a plan. This is just a theory, my opinion, that the powers that be within the NDIS have instructed NDIS planners and delegates to reduce expenditure on deaf plans. How are they doing this? By giving crap plans like they did for my wife. By giving ridiculous reasons for no access like they did for my friend. By coming up with some ridiculous reasoning that technology and time will somehow alleviate all need for human support such as captioners or Auslan interpreters.
Perhaps they think that if they make it hard enough, deaf people will give up. Perhaps they think that if they deny access as they did my friend, they will just go away. I really do not know. But what I am seeing is a pattern. It is pattern that suggests a deliberate strategy to reduce expenditure on deaf plans.
Perhaps, over time, the aim is to remove deaf from the NDIS all together unless they have really high needs such as additional disabilities. People like myself, who have strong language and independence, perhaps the long term aim is to remove us from the NDIS all together. It’s just a theory, my opinion, but I am certainly seeing a pattern.
It’s for this reason I am calling people to arms. We deaf people, and our representatives like Deaf Victoria and Deaf Australia need to start bringing attention to the shoddy way the NDIS is beginning to treat deaf people.
Ill go further and say the people working for the NDIS, who are deaf or have a disability, need to bring attention to this issue. If I was still working in the NDIS and I saw this happening, I would be so angry. Maybe these people should all get together and go on strike. People I know – the Michael’s, Sarah’s, Brian’s, Megan’s, Shane’s, Dane’s, Melissa’s and the Ryan’s, real people with a disability working within; we need them to speak out on our behalf!
Hey there! Guess what? I have retired. Yesiree – I have. My last day at work will be the 26th September 2024. I have been privileged to have worked these last two years back in the Deafness Sector. First with Expression Australia and now with Deaf Connect. Both have wonderful staff who are enormously committed to the Deaf community. As a Manager of Employment and currently 1:1 Support it was my great fortune to lead two great teams. It is a great way to go out. I will take stock for a year, address a couple of minor health issues that need surgery; then who knows!
I wanted this article to be totally positive. Alas, the disability sector has reared the ugly side of its head today. It was a 35-year career and when I recount what happened today, I wonder if it was all worth it. Did I, we, us actually make progress. Seems that we are forever taking two steps forward and four back.
So, today one of Australia’s top disability advocates declared that they were down to their last $114 in the bank. They have worked for decades in the sector and have been at the forefront of many great changes, including the NDIS. For this they have $114 to show. Take note, all you well paid CEOs and politicians!
So, this decorated advocate was invited to speak at the upcoming National Disability Summit. It’s a huge thing. Bill Shorten the current NDIS Minister and Michael Sukkar, the Shadow Minister for the NDIS, are keynotes. The timeless Graeme Innes is speaking too. The agenda is broad and includes disability workforce, sustainable disability employment, quality solutions etc etc. It’s the place to be for answers, no doubt. Organised by Informa and at $1895 a pop for two days, it had better be good.
$1895, let that sink in. There won’t be too many people with a disability there. What with 45% of them living in poverty. What with our hero advocate who has given decades of their life down to their last $114. There won’t be too many grassroots people there. No matter, the bigwigs know what they are doing. Don’t they?
Back to my hero friend-advocate who is extremely poor. They were invited to speak at the conference. Yay!!! Except, they were told they would have to cough up their own airfare for themselves and their carer. Cover their accommodation as well. I would hope their conference rego was covered. I am not sure at the time of writing. But what I do know is that this advocate is promoted prominently in the conference program.
So, they cannot go. Conference is next week. They have posted as much on Facebook and Linkedin. Some kind people have offered to cover their airfares and possibly some other expenses. Thats very nice but think of this; one of Australia’s premier disability advocates, who has given their life to the disability community and who knows disability back to front, has been asked to work for free, with no expenses covered. Sustainable employment, my arse! AND, people are having to offer our hero advocate charity for them to be able to attend! How shameful is that??
And this conference organiser has form. About a decade ago they refused to provide me with an Auslan interpreter for a disability employment conference, no less. They asked me to bring my own. They relented after their keynote speaker threatened to pull out in support of my quest to get them to pay. You see, I knew all the speakers and sponsors and emailed them all about the organisers refusal to provide me with access. Highlight was said keynote speaker starting their speech reminding the organiser of their obligations to provide access. I hope they noticed my little fist pump at the time.
So, I am retired. 35 years I have busted a gut to improve things for people with a disability and now this! You have to ask – Was it all worth it!
On Thursday 22nd of August the Government, with the support of the Coalition (of all people), pushed through legislation in Parliament to begin a comprehensive reform of the NDIS. Put simply, the NDIS is costing too much. The Government wants to cut costs as much as it can so that the NDIS doesn’t fall apart.
Sadly, everything about the new legislation is in legalese. There are very few accessible and practical explanations of what the legislation means. This means many people with a disability don’t have a clue what is going on. Me thinks the Government need to take a look at section 6.1 of the Disability Royal Commission recommendations about accessible communications. This should have happened as soon as the legislation was passed, not after. No interpreters at the pressers for NDIS related reform??? Not good enough.
I am not 100% across the new legislation either. So, what I have done here, rather than speak in legalese, is try to give some practical examples about how the legislation might change things. Particularly for people who are Deaf and hard of hearing.
The government wants to tighten the eligibility criteria.
Initially the NDIS was designed to help 460 000 people. It’s now at 600 000 and continues to grow. This has shocked everyone. No one predicted, for example, that 35% of participants would have Autism as their primary disability. They were further shocked that 78% of all NDIS participants under 18 have Autism as their primary disability.The original designers of the NDIS had this rather unrealistic idea that the NDIS would make lots of people more independent. It was their belief and hope that over time their need for the NDIS would lessen to a point where many would not need the NDIS anymore.
That didn’t happen. Instead, much of the support required stayed stable or increased overtime. Many of the people that the original designers of the NDIS thought would drop off the NDIS overtime are still there and the cost to support them is ongoing and increasing.
What the Government wants to do is get the States to take more responsibility so that the NDIS can, for want of a better word, offload people to the States. Particularly young people with a disability who receive early intervention.
They want the States to provide early intervention services through what are called ‘foundation services’. What foundation services will look like I have no idea. But for deaf kids, how they receive Auslan or speech therapy may be impacted. Audiology and hearing aid services are likely to continue through Australia Hearing. The responsibility for other supports now might be on the States. We will see.
I also suspect that there are many adults on the scheme who the Government feels should not be there either. I believe the new legislation will provide greater powers to the NDIA to deny, challenge and remove people from the scheme who they feel should not be there.
Can and cannot buy lists
The new legislation has provided the NDIA with more powers to say what can and cannot be purchased through the NDIS. There are lists being developed that will say what is considered an NDIS responsibility and what is not. This list will include both services and technology.
For people who are Deaf and hard of hearing this has been a very contentious area of the NDIS. Mostly because the decision making of the NDIS has been inconsistent. What one person can get, another cannot. For example, smart watches can link to alarms, alerts and draw attention to the fact a phone is ringing. Many argue that this is disability specific and that they should therefore be able to buy them with NDIS funds.
Some deaf people have managed to get Smart Watches while others have been denied. Some people get sophisticated visual alert systems that are safer and hard wired while others are forced to make do with cheaper, less effective and battery-based technology that is less reliable. Don’t get me started on the trouble the NDIS makes for people needing specific hearing aids. The NDIS will try to only approve the cheapest hearing aids possible, come hell or highwater. (This I know, having supported several people to appeal decisions, some successfully and some not.)
What will and won’t be on the lists is anyone’s guess. It is an attempt by the Government to prevent expenditure on what they deem as not disability specific and just everyday items. The disability community is up in arms about this. They are arguing that each individual has a different need and that a prescriptive list is not fair.
The list does not just outline technology, it also will outline types of supports and services that can be provided. The Government also seem to have legislated the NDIA new powers so that they can check up more regularly whether supports or technology purchased meet the guidelines. I would advise self-managed NDIS participants to be very certain that anything that they purchase is allowed.
Providers must register
Fraud from unscrupulous participants and service providers is costing the NDIS billions of dollars. The Government is keen to stop this. One of the ways they want to do this is by ensuring that all providers of services through the NDIS are registered.
As Bill Shorten explained on the ABC show, Insiders; we wouldn’t want a taxi driver to be driving us who had not shown that they had a license. Shorten explained that it is reasonable to expect that all NDIS providers should be registered and show that they can do the job.
For example, they should all have police checks and if they are working with children, Working With Childrens Checks. All service providers, big or small, under the new legislation will need to lodge proof that they have these clearances as part of their registration process. Currently, only registered service providers are required to do this.
By registering all providers, the NDIA, presumably, will be able to monitor providers more closely. I believe that the legislation is proposing a three-tiered system that depends on the level of support, amount of support and the skill level required.
Many Deaf people negotiate private jobs with their favourite interpreter. Some Deaf people use a person that they are comfortable with who may not have any qualifications at all. The new legislation is likely to mean that Deaf people can only use interpreters who are with an agency or who have registered with the NDIS who have provided proof of their qualifications.
Some will rejoice at this; others will be frustrated at the loss of choice and control that it brings with it. It most certainly will prevent interpreting funding being fraudulently used for things such as cleaning which is known to happen. I suspect interpreters will have to provide their NAATI registration number for every job that they do under the NDIS. That is not necessarily a bad thing.
More power to the NDIAto tackle fraud and rorts
If the NDIA feels that a plan is not being used correctly and funds have not been spent properly for NDIS purposes, they now have stronger powers to issue debt notices and demand participants repay the misspent money. Likewise, if they find a provider is overcharging or using ‘creative accounting’ they have more powers to now hold these service providers to account, prosecute and demand repayment.
I guess that with these new powers participants and service providers are on notice that the NDIA will not tolerate misuse of funds or incorrectly claiming funds. It will use its powers to recoup money that it believes has been wrongly claimed or spent.
New navigator services
The new legislation is apparently phasing out Support Coordination, Plan Management and Local Area Coordinators. The aim is to set up what the Government has named Navigators. Detail on how Navigator supports will be structured is scant.
Previously, Local Area Coordinators acted as information gatherers and provided information to the NDIS delegates about what was needed in a participant’s plan. From this information NDIS delegates would develop and approve plans. The information gathering and plan development, from my reading, will now be the sole domain of the NDIS delegates. NDIS delegates previously only gathered information for plan development for more complex participants.
Many readers will be familiar with Support Coordinators and Plan Managers. These supports are charged at an hourly rate and funded in plans where required. There are many great Support Coordinators and Plan Managers but there are also some shonky ones that practice what can only be described as ‘creative accounting’. It is believed that the new Navigator services are partly designed to reduce costs and expenditure on Support Coordinators and Plan Managers.
My understanding is that the aim is for Support Coordination and Plan Management to no longer be funded in plans. It also seems that the Local Area Coordinators services costs will be absorbed into the new Navigator role. The NDIA will develop a tender process where service providers can tender to become Navigators. How the Navigator role will be funded and structured, I do not know.
Suffice to say, the organisations that win the tenders for Navigator services will likely receive block funding. They most likely will be charged with assisting NDIS participants to:
Apply for NDIS Access (New participants)
Understand and implement plans, find service providers and set up services.
Where needed, carry out the old Plan Management role.
Assist those people with a disability that don’t qualify for the NDIS to locate and access local State based services, including the mysterious foundation supports.
That’s my reading of it anyway. I know that some of the Navigators will be ‘Specialist Navigators’. Maybe there will be ‘SPECIALIST’ Deaf Navigator services too, who knows. I suspect Navigator services will be tendered per region, not dissimilar to how the current Local Area Coordinator providers were set up. Successful tenders will recruit suitable employees that can fulfil the various roles. This is just me being Nostradamus. The devil will be in the detail.
I must stress that what I have written above are entirely my own interpretations and readings of the various information that has been distributed. The opinions within are entirely my own as well. What I have written only scratches the surface of the new legislation. I could be very wrong in many of my assumptions. I encourage people to ask plenty of questions.
Hopefully, there will be some clear and easily understood information coming from the Government soon about the new legislation and what it means. All I really know is that the Government means business in cutting the cost of the NDIS. The intent is to make NDIS sustainable into the future.
Will these changes succeed in reducing costs? Are these changes fair? Will they make the NDIS better? That I do not know. A lot of the suggested changes make me feel very uneasy. All we can do hereon is WATCH THIS SPACE. There is no stopping the juggernaut that Bill Shorten has bludgeoned through.
*** Please note this article is an attempt to explain the impact of some of the NDIS legislation without the legal speak. This article only explains the impact of a very small part of the legislation.
Image is of a yellow Minion from the movie Despicable Me. They are yellow, with blue overalls and a large eye in the middle of their head. There are sparse wisps of hair on their head.
I was described as a Minion today. I was quite flattered. The Minions I know, and probably you too, are cute and cuddly. They are from the movie Despicable Me. They are funny and busy and they do all that they can to please people. Perhaps they are a little bumbling sometimes, but there are worse things to be compared to I guess.
In recent times I have begun to feel very much like an NDIS Minion. I don’t work for the NDIS any more. I have not for quite some time. But I can’t seem to get away from the NDIS. You see, for better or for worse, I have a reputation of assisting people to get better plans when the NDIS mucks them up. Of late, this has been very frequently.
I even got mention on a Facebook post. An orgnaisation was offering parents of Deaf children support to review their plans. They suggested that I might be a good person to assist them too, and tagged me to the post. I guess that’s what being a Minion is. You’re always available to help and support. I do this voluntarily by the way. It helps me dissipate my anger at the monumental cock ups that the NDIS make.
I am not sure what is happening over in NDIS land but its very dire. My wife finally got around to applying for the NDIS last year. This is ironic really. Here is me, so called NDIS guru, and my wife and I have never applied for it ourselves. I think I’m avoiding it cos I reckon the process will make me blow a gasket. I mean my poor wife applied last September and her plan was only approved last week, mid July 2024. Of course, being Deaf, the NDIS rang her numerous times, as they do. Delaying the process even more.
And what a shocker of a plan it was. I mean here is my wife, an Auslan user. She uses Auslan to participate in many community things. Later this year our son and his partner are getting married. Interpreters needed for speeches and to mingle . The NDIS was gonna help with this we thought. But do you know how much interpreting funding she got? Even after detailing all the things she needed it for; the wedding, social gatherings, the private allied health appointments she was likely to attend etc …. Her interpreting funds were zilch, nada, nothing!!!
She got six grand all up. Of which two grand is to pay for a plan manager. Three grand something to pay for OT assessments. A whopping total of $300 to pay for low cost technology. I’m not sure what she will get for $300. Maybe she can enter some sort of lucky dip.
And so she joined the ever growing list of people I am now assisting to review their plans. Currently the list stands at four. The cock ups that the NDIS make are just mind boggling. I honestly wonder where they find some of their planners, so ignorant do they seem to be.
The current trend of planners is to reduce Auslan interpreting over time. You see, Deaf people use Auslan interpreters, supposedly, to build capacity to communicate. Apparently, after a certain amount of time Deaf people will develop skills to be able to communicate without interpreters. Supposedly, they develop super powers for lipreading. Or perhaps they begin to utilise post it notes to write and receive messages, as one planner suggested to a participant a few years back.
I am not quite sure what is going on in the head of planners but it seems that you start with a set amount of interpreter hours, in the second year you half it and by the third year it is one hour a week until its not needed anymore. You might think that I am being absurd, but no, this is actually happening.
The other trend, and perhaps this happened with my wife, is that if you have a cochlear implant or you speak really well, then no form of communication assistance is needed. You can speak well and therefore you can communicate anywhere and any time. Presumably, you do all the talking so that you do not have to waste your time understanding what others might be saying. I dunno! This is an insight into the working mind of some of the planners that are currently employed by the NDIS.
And this morning I woke up to a post about a family of a Deaf child. They apparently had $17000 over two years. At review this was reduced to, wait for it, $600 for the next two years. For what? I am not sure. I am not sure I want to know. They asked for Auslan for the family and Auslan interpreting for when the daughter might need it – All of this will be covered with $600, over two years or $300 year. The person that made the post said that their blood was boiling. Me? I just want to weep.
And Bill Shorten, bless him, is carrying on about how fraud is costing the NDIS so much money. He is making a song and dance about banning Sex assistance for people with a disability that need it. Meanwhile, the planners in the NDIS are dishing out shit like I have just described. Reviews go in, administrative time is eaten up processing them, legal fees are paid etc etc etc. If Mr Shorten wants to save some money, he might want to look a little bit closer to home. These pathetic excuses for NDIS plans are costing the NDIS millions!
If you will excuse me, I will get back to being the weekend NDIS Minion. I have four people including my wife to assist. I have to process the complaints, inform them how to gather evidence for their reviews, help them write the reviews and even help them respond to questions that come back from the NDIS. Often times, because LACs are not doing their jobs, I am also explaining how a plan works and contacting LACs to remind them to activate plans so that the paltry amount that has been approved can be used.
It’s the weekend, Ill get back to it, enjoy your weekend all! Poopaye! (Which is Minion for goodbye! )
The image is taken from the website – Intimate Rider. It shows an example of sex aids that can assist people with mobility issues to enjoy sex and intimacy. In the image are a man and a woman The woman is in an orange lingerie set. The man is muscular and a wheelchair user. He is sitting in a chair designed to assist him to experience sex and intimacy.
SEX
Right, now I have your attention. That word does funny things to people. For many it is still taboo. It is a word that makes many people feel incredibly uncomfortable. The mere mention of this word can turn people’s faces red. Indeed, one of the most popular pieces I have ever written is Being Turned On – Sex and the Deaf! (with hearing people) – You can read it here. It still gets comments nearly 20 years later. It is only rivaled by the piece on Helen Keller, The Helen Keller Myth. You can read that too by clicking on the title. Mind you, if you are a Helen Keller fan, you might want to give it a miss.
But I digress, this article is about sex. Specifically, about the rights of people with a disability to access it. I use sex here broadly. I am actually discussing sex, intimacy, pleasure and the right of people with a disability to access it.
For people with a disability there can be many challenges to experience sex and intimacy. These might be cognitive, sensorineural or physical. Some individuals with a disability require support and adjustments to experience sex and intimacy. Someone with severe physical disabilities, for example, may need human assistance or adapted aids.
The website Fearless Women had this to say about sex and intimacy:
“Sex is on the basic and bottom of Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Physiological. It’s next to Breath, Air, Sleep, Food, Water. It’s basically “Survival”. It’s an animal instinct – like the wild kingdom. It’s a visceral need of human mankind.“
“Closeness and intimate relationships are an important human experience which can provide a person with security, support, and connectedness across the lifespan including the period of a life-limiting illness. Intimacy, sexuality and sexual expression are basic human needs which can contribute positively to health and quality of life”
So, let’s be very clear – sex and intimacy are seen as crucial to human survival. Sex and intimacy contribute to self-worth, positive mental health and having a good quality of life.
Naturally, people with a disability are in the same bracket. Sex and intimacy are essential for their sense of worth, well-being and quality of life. They want it and need it. However, it is not always easy for people with a disability to experience sex and intimacy.
For example, neurodivergent individuals may struggle with sex and intimacy. Some like excessive touch whilst others spurn being touched. Textures, temperature changes and the environment can cause difficulties for some. Often people who are neurodivergent need therapy to allow them to enjoy and experience sex and intimacy. The website, Neuro Diverse Couples, notes:
“Neurodiverse couples need to be able to find a therapist who can work with their particular needs. This might include exploring issues around sensory processing or managing anxiety, as well as finding ways for partners to enjoy physical and emotional intimacy in a way that works for both of them.”
Interestingly, people with physical disabilities appear to be well thought of when it comes to aids that can help them experience sex, intimacy and pleasure. There is a great website called Intimate Rider. It sells aids which allow people with physical and mobility issues to enjoy sex and intimacy. It also provides information about how these aids can assist people with different disabilities. But it doesn’t come cheap. An Intimate Rider set costs $715.
Another great site is XES. This site sells aids that allow people with physical disabilities to self-pleasure and experience intimacy. For example, there may be individuals who have coordination issues or limited flexibility. These aids assist. There is an item called a Bon Bon Sex Toy Mount where it will hold the sex toy for ease of use for people that are unable to do so. Another item is a Pulse Solo Essential which assists males with masturbation. These items are not cheap, the former is $189 whilst the latter is $174.
There are also people with a disability that will require assistance to self-pleasure or who want actual human touch. These people will employ sex workers to assist them. This seems to repulse people, but it is absolutely reasonable support. There are specialist sex workers who assist people with a disability. Again, this comes at a cost. There is a great website called sexworker.org.au that provides fantastic information about the work and support that these workers provide to assist people with a disability experience sex and intimacy.
Why am I writing about this? Well recently the NDIS Minister, Bill Shorten, has indicated that the NDIS will ban funding sex work through the NDIS. Showing his extreme ignorance, Minister Shorten had this to say – “We will rule it out, yeah, we will rule it out. It’s just not a sustainable proposition, it doesn’t pass the test, does it?” And what was Minister Shorten’s argument for banning sex work through the NDIS? (All of which encompasses the examples that I have provided here.) Well, this is what he said – “The reality is I’ve got one or two examples I’m aware of that it’s ever happened, ever. So, it’s not what’s happening in most of the scheme.”
Confused? Me too. Apparently, because the demand for sex work under the NDIS is so low, it’s not needed. So, what happens? A support that is not in high demand, that isn’t costing the Scheme all that much and for some is an essential support will be removed. Go figure.
We are talking here, according to Mr River Night on Linkedin, “… just over 100 of 600 000 of 4.4 Million Aussies living with disability.” The 600 000 are those who are accessing the NDIS. So, 100 of 600 000 people who are needing access to this essential support will now lose that support. And, no future participant of the NDIS will ever again be able to access it. Yet, Minister Shorten is saying that such support is not sustainable and that it doesn’t pass the test – You can see him saying so here:
So that’s it. An essential human need and right is going to be denied to people with a disability because Minister Shorten thinks it doesn’t pass the test. And we thought Stuart Robert and Linda Reynolds were bad. Let me tell you – It does pass the test. It passes it in every shape and form – It is a cost of disability and an essential human need. It is that simple.
And do you know what? It is well known that sex abuse of people with a disability is high. By funding support such as I have just described, it allows people with a disability to experience sex and intimacy in a safe environment. This means they are less at risk of sexual predators.
Re-think this Minister Shorten, you are way out of touch!
With thanks to Anytime Auslan who provided their staff interpreter, free of charge to translate this very important article!
The Rebuttal 