Our National Disability Insurance Scheme is again under the spotlight. The cost of it has "blown out" and will continue to rise - or so we are told. There are demands to look at who is getting help and what sort of help they are getting.
I agree it needs to be done. The title of today's blog post is not a joke. I do not personally know anyone who has been able to obtain the services of a sex worker under the NDIS but I do know people who believe they or someone they know should be entitled to just that. Their arguments go along the lines of "we have the same right as anyone else..." I disagree.
Yesterday I was talking to someone whose daughter has recently been diagnosed with motor neurone disease. It has been a devastating blow to the family. In all likelihood both parents will outlive their daughter and have to watch her decline. Her husband and children will also have to do this. It isn't something any family should have to go through.
It is something we know a little about as a family. The Senior Cat's cousin had MND and we were all too well aware of his decline and the strain it put on the family. There was no NDIS to help then, even had B... been young enough to benefit.
And I wonder how much help R...'s family will get with her illness. I suspect it will be very little. They will have to rely on family and, perhaps, friends. In this case the family support will be there but I am all too well aware that many "friends" will drop away.
This however is where the NDIS should be helping. It should be helping in a practical way. It needs to help with all the usual activities of daily living. Once needed that help should be there quickly and reliably.
As we could not even rely on the very small amount of assistance offered to the Senior Cat I doubt R... and her family will get what they will need. Instead we will have an entire extended family trying to cope alone.
They will be doing this while others are getting "help" they do not need. I don't know whether "sex workers" appear anywhere but I do know that more than one person perfectly well able to do certain tasks themselves is using NDIS funding to have those tasks done for them. They find it convenient and have congratulated themselves on "getting something for nothing". What is more they have social workers and suppliers who naturally agree with them.
And then there is the child I know who will never have the necessary control to use their own voice. Her parents tried to get a VOCA (voice output communication aid) for her through NDIS. They were turned down on the grounds that she was "too young" and would not be able to use it. That left them with no choice but to find one elsewhere. The "voice" was entirely wrong for a child of any age and there was no alternative. In the end S.... who caused me so much trouble several years ago solved the problem. He asked his girlfriend's little sister to record the words the child uses and built those into the device. He worked with the child's family and the speech pathologist to do this.
Yes, that's great - but it seems to me that the NDIS should have been helping here. They should be helping W's great-granddaughter. Due to Covid she has not been to any sort of pre-school until this year. She did not even mix with any adults outside the immediate family. She is of at least average intelligence but she says almost nothing and what she does say is barely intelligible. Six months of speech therapy might make all the difference to her ability to start school as a "normal" child rather than one who may need ongoing assistance. Her family will be paying for it but isn't this the sort of thing for which the NDIS should be used?
And what about the local family whose son has lost a leg and whose other issues mean he cannot have a prosthesis or use crutches. His wheelchair is too small. It's uncomfortable. He is already have problems with his shoulders as he tries to push himself around. His mother told me that the NDIS have told her that any help for another chair is at least another eighteen months away. Is this how the NDIS is supposed to work?
Someone suggested that the funding model chosen was one which allowed rorting. Quite possibly that is the case. It is similar to the model chosen to fund aged care. The previous government is being blamed. It is convenient to blame them of course.
The reality however is that the funding models are designed by so called "public servants". Those public servants are also advised by university departments which teach relevant areas like social work and economics. Their philosophies are based on "rights" rather than genuine "needs".
Withdrawing funding from some is going to be very difficult but it needs to be done. Wheelchairs or sex workers? I'd say wheelchairs every time - it might get you to a sex worker if you so desire but you can pay for the latter yourself.
Posts
1 comment:
Quite right.
Post a Comment