LISA

2009-12-01T04:55:00.002+11:00

Child Care Shame
Report finds system failing kids at risk
"Victorian Government Departments are Bomb Proof"
Melbourne's MX, Thursday 26 November 2009

Victoria's Community Services Minister Lisa Neville is under pressure to resign after an Ombudsman's report children had been placed in the care of sex offenders and even died while in care.

The watchdog's damning report found almost a quarter of abused children were not given case workers, and staff manipulated figures to meet State Government performance goals [http://www.ombudsman.vic.gov.au/www/html/88-media-releases.asprevealed].

Ombudsman George Brouwer's report into the Department of Human Services Child Protection Program exposed cases in which children had died or been seriously injured by carers.

Yet these cases had attracted little or no external scrutiny, Brouwer said.

In Gippsland, almost three in five children who had been reported at risk had not been allocated a case worker.

The report showed a system in crisis, the Opposition said.

A spokesman for Opposition Leader Ted Baillieu said Neville should have resigned long ago, and this should seal her fate.

Neville admitted there were significant failures in the system and said each of the Ombudsman's 42 recommendations would be implemented.

Neville said she was "disturbed" that figures had been manipulated.

"If this is happening, it's unacceptable and will stop," she told reporters.

The department had asked for an investigation of these allegations and would report back within three months, Neville said.

She said case workers spent 50 per cent of their time in the Children's Court and this was a significant factor in staff attrition.

Attorney-General Rob Hulls said the Children's Court would be overhauled to address flaws in the system.

LISA Comment: Here we see the Minister taking a lashing, whilst her department protects itself from scrutiny better than the Baghdad green zone.

The Department of Human Services has unlimited power over people. Anyone who is effective in exposing their questionable activities, is quashed by the department's despotic jack boot. We suffered their wrath in the form of a six page ministerial approved directive very assertively against us, but with no right of appeal. The department is so powerful, they can use Robert Mugabe style justice in Australia.

We are not surprised many children had no case worker. Case workers are as scarce as hen's teeth within the whole of the Department of Human Services. Even so, they have a conflict of interest.

This is especially so in Disability Services. Case workers and key workers intended to represent the interests of the client, the person with a disability, with the department as the service provider, are employees of, and paid by the department.

This is conflict of interest similar to that where the service and the inspection are under the same Minister. Community visitors and department's group homes which they inspect, are under the same Minister.

There is no end to the covert questionable activities of this Victorian Government Department. The Department of Human Services is accountable to no one. It even thumbs it's nose at the findings of the Auditor General of Victoria in his 2008 report on accommodation for people with a disability. http://www.audit.vic.gov.au/reports__publications/reports_by_year/2008/20080312_disability_accom.aspx.

Victorians with a disability and their families wonder if they will ever get a real and even playing field complaints process. A complaints board consisting of just people from outside industry, with real power to direct the department to provide services within the direction, intention and spirit of their extensive and very comprehensive care policies standards and values.

Tony & Heather Tregale
LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION (LISA) INC.
Tel: 03-9434-3810: Email: vk3qq@optusnet.com.au Web: www.lisainc.com.au : www.lisa-aus.blogspot.com
NOTE: We are always interested in feedback and information; general, specific, good or bad. If you wish anonymously: Our mail address is 73 Nepean Street, Watsonia, 3087

Australian Family Paints a Glowing Picture of UK Services

2009-11-16T16:59:00.000+11:00

Australian Family Paints a Glowing Picture of UK
Services for People with a Disability and their Families
Channel Seven's Sunday Night says Services in Australia are Shocking
Sunday 15 November 2009

An Australian Television Program Producer moved his family to the UK earlier this year because he was sick of battling for the under performing support services here in Australia for his son who has autism.

http://www.lisainc.com.au/userfiles/file/Family%20moves%20overseas%20to%20obtain%20rights%20based%20services.pdf

The little credible help there is in Australia, has been a long time coming, and is no thanks to the Federal Government. The politicians have all but turned their backs on people with autism spectrum disorder and their caring families.

Out of sheer desperation, and having hit a brick wall in Australia, Dr Kevin Maxwell moved his family to the UK. He says there is recognition, responsibility and a role by law that the UK local authorities provide intensive early intervention therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder at no cost. The very few similar services in Australia cost around $30,000.

All day, every day, Kevin's son receives what Australia failed to deliver - intensive therapy by pro-active and very caring service providers - the UK local authorities.

It is Australia's shame, that Australia cannot do it like the UK. Intensive early intervention is few and far between in Australia, and the Government funding level is a scandal, Dr Maxwell said.

LISA Comment: Although most of the services in Australia for people with a disability are "hand-out" rather than "rights" based, we consider increased government funding is only part of the answer to meaningful quality of life services. Much of the difference between UK and Australian services is attitude.

Providing the meaningful care which Dr Maxwell says his son is receiving in the UK, requires staff chosen on their ability to treat the person for whom they are providing care like their second family. Or like the Victorian Auditor General says:-

In 2007, about 94 per cent of DHS staff had a Certificate IV qualification (compared to DHS's estimate of about half at the time of the last audit). Many CSOs we audited did not have a minimum qualification requirement for their staff. Instead, they chose staff on the basis of their attitude and ability to provide support rather than [minder] care."

Nevertheless, parents who are getting meaningful intensive early intervention therapy for their member with autism, by whatever means, should consider, at present, parents do not live forever, and the level and quality of care in many group homes, and similar, is far from compatible.

This means, the meaningful intensive ("Active Support") therapy practices are not reinforced throughout the person's life, if they find themselves in such circumstances as a group home, or even respite. The Victorian Auditor General also said:-

"In most DHS and CSO houses we audited, funding and work arrangements did not readily allow for staff to care for residents individually. Staff were often under pressure to complete basic care tasks in the time allotted."

Tony & Heather Tregale
LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION (LISA) INC.
Tel: 03-9434-3810: Email: vk3qq@optusnet.com.au Web: www.lisainc.com.au : www.lisa-aus.blogspot.com

Parents fight bureaucracy

2009-10-28T13:27:00.006+11:00

Parents fight for greater protection
Diamond Valley Leader Newspaper
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Disability Reporter: Engel Schemidi

A Watsonia couple's fight to have their son's voice, silenced by disability, heard by authorities has been validated in a damning report.

www.publicadvocate.vic.gov.au/publications/123/

But Tony and Heather Tregale say the annual report by the Public Advocate's Community Visitors program, tabled in state parliament this month, scratches at the surface of the problems in disability group homes.

The couple are campaigning for Community Visitors volunteers who visit and report to the Public Advocate's Office on the conditions of homes caring for the disabled - to be compelled to speak to guardians of residents, many of whom are unable to communicate.

The Tregales are now content with the care their 33-year-old son, Paul, who has autism and an intellectual disability, receives.

But their concerns about violence and neglect in his previous homes are backed up by the report. "Those with limited intellectual capacity are extremely vulnerable to abuse and neglect, often by the people intended to care for them," Mr Tregale said.

He said Paul had been left to stare at walls for hours because residents were not taken out. "You would see his bank balance go up and that showed they had not bothered to take him anywhere."

Some of the findings from the report include: Concerns residents didn't complain for fear of reprisals; Staff monitoring conversations between Community Visitors and residents; and Poor staff-to-resident ratios impacting quality of care.

Mr Tregale said a clause should be added to the Disability Act 2006, outlining Community Visitors' obligations to speak to guardians. Mr Tregale said guardians could direct complaints to the house supervisor, regional director and the disability services commissioner, but that process had not resolved his issues in the past.

The Office of the Public Advocate would not comment on the Tregales' concerns. Community Services Minister Lisa Neville said Community Visitors could speak to guardians if they wanted and many disabled people could speak on their own behalf.

LISA Comment: It is interesting to note, the reporter got a "no comment" from the Office of the Public Advocate ("OPA")! Whereas the failure of commonsense by this pseudo government department, affects almost all residents of supported accommodation group homes throughout the State of Victoria.

Most residents have insufficient capacity to fully understand the level and quality of care they are receiving, or if this is within the service provider's care policies, standards and values. Those who might have some understanding, understand the consequences of saying anything.

Community Visitors therefore, at best, get only service provider staff views when visiting the majority of group homes, as the OPA ensures parents, families, guardians, advocates or friends of the residents are not consulted where Community Visitors have had no meaningful communications with a resident or residents during a visit to a group home.

In total contrast, when the community visitors concept was first enacted under the Intellectually Disabled Persons' Services Act 1986, community visitors were actively encouraged to go everywhere, meet everyone and spread their personal contact details through cards and posters. And we did! As we were community visitors for six years from when the program first started in 1987.

Now, under the Disability Act 2006, the program legislation is watered down, the program is introvert and community visitors protected from the very people they are intended to protect - vulnerable people and their families.

Finally, the reporter failed to mention, "The Minister responsible for the services in supported accommodation group homes, is the same person responsible for the service monitor - the Community Visitors Program"..... It is little wonder the program has been watered down, sanitised and introverted!

Tony & Heather Tregale
LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION (LISA) INC.
Tel: 03-9434-3810: Email: vk3qq@optusnet.com.au Web: www.lisainc.com.au : www.lisa-aus.blogspot.com
NOTE: We are always interested in feedback and information; general, specific, good or bad. If you wish anonymously: Our mail address is 73 Nepean Street, Watsonia, 3087

NEW WEBSITE now OPERATIONAL

2009-10-01T21:13:00.004+10:00

Tony & Heather announce, the new web site for LISA is NOW FULLY OPERATIONAL at: www.lisainc.com.au

LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION

2004-08-28T14:10:00.002+10:00

LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION (L.I.S.A.) GROUP

One of the best places for those with an intellectual disability is to continue living with their family. Unfortunately, parents do not live forever, or are able to provide adequate support for ever, and other family members may not be able to take on the commitment. So, we urge families not to leave it to the last moment before investigating the option of supported accommodation for their family member. Equally, if your family member is living in supported accommodation we can help you better understand service level and quality entitlements.

We are a small unfunded lobby group working where the large funded advocacy groups are generally reluctant to tread. Our aim is to encourage quality of life improvement for those with an intellectual disability living in supported accommodation, especially that provided by DisAbility Services of the Department of Human services, by focusing our energy on those factors which directly effect the level and quality of service at the service point.

Those with an intellectual disability are generally unable to advocate effectively for themselves. They are therefore very reliant on support staff to provide a comprehensive level of care which should be designed and intended to enhance their lifestyle to the full extent of their ability. It is disappointing that many supported accommodation residents, especially those with high support needs, receive mainly basic care, with quite limited developmental, interactive and social activities.

Comprehensive care is often limited through the inability of service provider management to set, monitor and maintain staff work value expectations, and to provide support for the effective supervision necessary to ensure residents receive an overall quality lifestyle. Many service providers are also limited in their ability to select staff with the right attitude, and to monitor the right attitude is maintained. Where the overall level of care is good, credit is usually due to the integrity of particular direct care staff. We consider that service provider management should ensure the residents of all homes receive an overall quality lifestyle, not for residents to be lucky to have good staff.

Some service providers have a long standing reputation for making it as difficult as possible for anyone to question their level and quality of service provision, being more concerned with self-preservation than self-assessment and real customer service. It is therefore important for families and friends to be aware of what they can expect of the service, in order that they may ensure the person with the disability is receiving the very best service. Some of the areas which help to ensure service quality are:-

· Government response timelines.
· A formal grievance process.
· A care plan or service contract.
· Encourage early compliance with Standards
· Provide tenancy agreements.
· A comprehensive Key Worker policy
· Parent, family and general public involvement in service
management.
· More effective Community Visitors.
· Have service providers provide pro-active services.

For more information call Tony & Heather Tregale on telephone 03-9434-3810, or Email: vk3qq@optusnet.com.au

COMMUNITY VISITORS

2004-08-28T14:01:00.003+10:00

"DISADVANTAGED BY LAW"
Disadvantaged by the very law intended to protect them!

Residents of supported accommodation group homes for those with an intellectual or multiple disability throughout Victoria and New South Wales are disadvantaged by the very law intended to protect them.

Those with limited intellectual capacity are extremely vulnerable to abuse and neglect, often by the very people who are intended to care for them. One of the intended safeguards, is the Community Visitor Program.

The community visitor program was established under legislation to allow independent people from the community to officially visit and inspect the services and facilities in supported accommodation group homes.

The functions of a community visitor are, for example, to visit residential services (group homes) and inquire into the appropriateness and standard of premises, the adequacy of opportunities for inclusion and participation by residents in the community, any case of suspected abuse or neglect of a resident, any failure to comply with the provisions of the Act and any complaint made to a community visitor by a resident.

In practical terms, one would therefore see community visitors talking with both residents and service provider staff to ascertain the level and quality of care the residents are receiving.

This may be reasonable where the residents have at least some communications ability. But where residents have no meaningful communications, and are unable by reason of their disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, these residents are not represented.

In these circumstances, it is a reasonable human right that community visitors contact the residents' family, guardian, advocate, friend, etc, to see if they have any concerns about the care being provided.

The response from the bureaucrats who run the community visitor programs in both Victoria and New South Wales, is that community visitors do not contact anyone to represent residents who have no meaningful communications. And, they are not required to do so under the law. Yet it is reasonable common sense, and a reasonable human right to do so!

So we ask, "Why are seriously disadvantaged people in our community, further disadvantaged by the very law intended to protect them?" And, "Why is the same person responsible for both the service and the inspection?"

In Victoria, the Department of Human Service's direct service provision in their group homes, and the inspection of these services by Community Visitors are both within the portfolio of the Minister for Community Services.

Tony & Heather Tregale
LIFESTYLE IN SUPPORTED ACCOMMODATION (LISA) INC.
Tel: 03-9434-3810.
NOTE: We are always interested in feedback and information; general, specific, good or bad. If you wish anonymously: Our mail address is 73 Nepean Street, Watsonia, 3087

PLENARY GUARDIANSHIP

2004-08-28T13:58:00.000+10:00

PLENARY GUARDIANSHIP

What is Plenary Guardianship? It is what all parents have as a legal right, legal jurisdiction over their children’s activities, until their children reach the age of 18 years, or unless withdrawn by a court order.

The law considers that upon reaching the age of 18 years, the person is an adult, no longer under the influence or direction of parents. Most families celebrate this even as being a significant milestone in the young persons life.

It is indeed morally correct that there should be a time limit when parents no longer have legal authority over their offspring, and that the young person have freedom of decision over their own life.

Unfortunately there are some young people who, for various reasons, are unable to responsibly handle their new found freedom, potentially placing themselves and others at risk, and themselves disadvantaged. In this respect, this article will consider only those who are in this category because of their sever intellectual disability.

Many parents of severely intellectually disabled children, those who are totally unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning his personal circumstances and or estate, are concerned that after years of providing special care and protection, they are suddenly advised they have no legal rights after their son or daughter reaches the age of 18 years, and that anyone can challenge any of their decisions.

The very wide range of abilities of those with an intellectual disability makes the decision on the degree of freedom a complex process. It is for this reason that the government set up a body to independently consider if an intellectually disabled person is in need of assistance after reaching the age of 18 years.

In 1988 the government of Victoria passed legislation, the Guardianship & Administration Act 1986, to provide a body to consider the special circumstances where it is not desirable, for reasons of the person’s disability, to allow them full legal freedom over their lives at the age of consent, 18 years.

The Guardian and Administration Board (GAB) was established within the Act and under the Office of the Public Advocate to review applications from parents, family members and other who consider the person’s disability may disadvantage them, or place them and others at risk.

The GAB considers if there is a need for a person with a disability to have a degree of protection after the age of consent, similar to that which they received before. Prior to the age of consent, the person providing the protection is called the “Parent”, afterwards, the “Guardian”.

Within the legislation of the Guardianship & Administration Act 1986 there is two basic levels of guardianship, “Limited” and “Plenary”. These levels are provided to allow the GAB to tailor the degree of guardianship to needs and best interests of the disabled person, ensuring the disabled person is allowed as much freedom of choice as their disability will allow them in protecting their best interests.

For a person who is unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, Limited Guardianship cannot cater for their overall needs.

When considering Guardianship for those with a severe intellectual disability, only Plenary should be considered because the person’s ability will most often be considerably less than a non disabled person under 18 years, for whom the parents automatically have effective Plenary Guardianship. Plenary Guardianship is effectively that automatic legal protection which all parents have until their children reach the age of 18 years, or unless withdrawn by court order.

The Guardianship & Administration Board Act indicates in Section 22 (1) that in making a Guardianship Order the Board must be satisfied the person, (a) has a disability, (b) is unable by reason of this disability to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any of the matters in relation to his or her person or circumstances and, (c) is in need of a Guardian.

This section goes on to indicate that the Board must be satisfied that, (a) the needs of the person could not be met by other less restrictive means, (b) a Order would be in the best interests of the disabled person, (c) the Board cannot make a Plenary Order unless they are satisfied that the disabled person’s needs cannot be met with a Limited Order and, (d) any Order must be the least restrictive on the person with the disability.

We believe Section 22 of the Act has little significance when considering those with a severe intellectual disability!

Section 23 0f the Act of the Act indicates that the Board must satisfy itself that the proposed guardian is suitable to undertake the task.

IN SUMMARY:-

1. RIGHTS:
As parents you have no legal rights over your son or daughter after their 18th birthday!

2. NEEDS:
A person with a severe disability, which by reason of this disability they are unable to make reasonable judgements in respect to all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, is clearly in need of a plenary guardian. Similar to the situation before they reached the age of 18 years, as their ability remains significantly unaltered!

3. ACTION:

Apply to the Guardian & Administration Board (GAB) for a PLENARY ORDER.

Request, at the time of the application, that the Hearing be recorded, and that you be entitled to a copy of the tape/s, or transcript of the tape/s. Ensure you have a written agreement to this effect well before the Hearing date.

Before the Hearing commences, ensure the secession is being recorded, as per your written agreement.

4. AT THE HEARING, INSIST:-

(a) The disabled person’s ability has not altered on reaching the age of 18 years!
That having automatically have PLENARY GUARDIANSHIP, as parents, before 18 years, little has changed to alter the need after 18 years!

(b) The disabled person is unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate.

(c) The disabled person is clearly in need of a guardian in respect of being unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matter concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, and for these reasons is in need of a guardian for all life areas – a PLENARY GUARDIAN!

(d) That the disabled person is unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstance and/or estate, having someone (a guardian) to look their best interests cannot be considered restrictive. There can, therefore be no least restrictive considerations!

(e) That the disabled person is unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matter concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, there is a clear need to cater for all life areas in respect to the provision of guardianship if the disabled person’s quality of life is to be preserved and enhanced. It is clear, therefore, that the person’s needs cannot be met by other than a PLENARY ORDER!

(f) In view of the clear need for a PLENARY ORDER where the disabled person is unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and/or estate, the Board should concentrate its efforts on ensuring the continuing suitability of those persons making the guardianship application under Section 23 of the Act, rather than concentrating almost exclusively on reasons of need, when it has been clearly established that the disabled person is totally unable to make reasonable judgements in respect of all or any matters concerning their personal circumstances and or estate.