Slicing up that ol’ disability pie

AliceC says:

08:32am | 03/03/11

I think he’s sceptical of how the funds will be found by the government, considering they have had to introduce a levy for the flood victims.

acotrel says:

10:24am | 03/03/11

‘On Q and A Bill Shorten was understandably supportive of his “baby”, and acknowledged that even the opposition is “making all the right noises”. Malcolm Turnbull spoke of a “generous and compassionate response”. ‘

Those two guys must need double jointed arms to help them slap each other on the back? Sounds like the disabled are stuffed!

Gladys says:

11:55am | 03/03/11

Persephone: You missed the point. The Government has created a package which apparently increases home care to more than two visits - which I assume means the total personal care package, such as a shower and a bit of therapy.

That is not ‘Rolls Royce’ in my opinion. That is a basic necessity. And it’s the sort of service the STATES have been cutting back for years.

You’re always very quick to defend your government. Today you’ve done it in such a way that if I knew who you were, I’d report you to the discrimination commissioner for calling a person who may or may not be housebound (the writer indicated he’d had a bit of a mishap which happens from time to time) paranoid.

And don’t think I’m some bleeding heart who doesn’t tease my paraplegic friends from time to time saying they drive like an old lady.

You just don’t know how people with disabilities live and you’ve written off his article with a purile ‘paranoid, much?’ like you’re Amy Adams.

It’s a good thing I never had any respect for you in the first place. I sure as hell certainly don’t have any for you now.

MK says:

12:54pm | 03/03/11

@Gladys….well stated! Has Persephoney ever missed the point.

We suffer daily with disability in the family and to read such trite comments from someone like P who always has an opinion on how great her beloved party is has really made me fume today. No party cares enough about the unseen.

Persephony…Step into someone’s shoes who suffers daily from a disability and a carer who has to work, pay bloody taxes and then come home to look after a family member with no govt help because they earn just a little too much - overtime that is to pay medical expenses - so are ineligible for any help before you add your nasty uninformed comments.

Glenda Lee says:

03:17pm | 04/03/11

We MIGHT trust when we actually GET equal opportunity.  I definitely understand Angry Cripple’s sentiments.  The report is not a promise it is merely a proposal that the Gov and the people of Australia can reject if they choose to.  Woe is them if they do tho!

acotrel says:

10:27am | 03/03/11

Does Kevvy Andrews get a disability support pension for being deaf?

Adam Diver says:

11:03am | 03/03/11

I don’t want to seem heartless but can you elaborate more on two points for me.

1. Why does he not live with a member of your family, or accomodation paid by for your family. (does he need specialized care)?

2. What type of accomodation do we need for people such as your brother? Is it basically aged care aimed at yung disabilities or would it be specialized care for different disabilities?

Please don’t be offended I honestly would like to know more about this issue on an individual level. If we can have entire suburbs supported with our taxes, I fail to see how we can’t support the disabled have proper acommodation and care.

Gladys says:

12:02pm | 03/03/11

@ Adam:

My cousin is profoundly intellectually disabled. My uncle and aunt are gone (dead) and he is in a facility for the aged. Fortunately he is almost 60 now so he fits in.

My cousins have families of their own. One has 6 children, the other has 3. One lives 2 hours away, the other lives in another state.

My cousin has found a greater sense of independence and identity by being outside of his family. It is what all parents of disabled chidlren hope for - that their kids might get some independence.

Why should his brother and sister forego their lives - and I mean not be a teacher or doctor - and the weight of his care be borne by their families? And by that I mean their husband and wife?

Do you really think that a sibling - as much as they love their brother - should not have a life because of a random accident of birth?

You must live in a vacuum to not understand why a kid (who has CP which is not an intellectual disability) wants to be independent.

Adam Diver says:

02:04pm | 03/03/11

Look, i would not want to look after a disabled family member either. But having an expectation on the government to replace the family structure (in all facets of society) is selfish.

I am not saying I wouldn’t be selfish either, but I think financially the family has a responsibility, particularly if independence is craved by the individual who is disabled.

The problem I have is that in my experience many individuals turn to the government for help first before thier families. Family responsibility is long gone unfortunately.

However beyond that, for disabled people who don’t have family resources, I am interested in the varying levels of care that they need. I find it difficult to comprehend, young disabled people in nursing homes, whilst whole suburbs are subsidised by the tax payer.

Gladys says:

03:24pm | 03/03/11

@ Adamdiver: So it’s ok for you to not want to nurse a person full-time but it’s selfish for other people to not want to nurse a person?

BTW I’m not sure I made myself clear. If my cousin who is a doctor looked after my intellectually disabled cousin, we would be short a doctor. If my other cousin (his sister) did it, we would lose a teacher.

So what do you we do here? Do we forego a doctor and/or teacher so they can care for this person?

Or are my parents selfish for not taking my cousin in?

The simple fact is, in a uspported environment of peers, people with disabilities do very well.

Lauren J says:

04:08pm | 03/03/11

Oh and one more thing Adam, my brother pays his way the rent in this place he is in is not cheap. And he works 7 days a week selling the Big issue. and my mother also supports him.

NEFFA says:

05:27pm | 03/03/11

why dont you all move to Cambodia and see how much government support you get there.

sometimes you need some perspective to understand just how good you have it.

Single Parent Carer says:

10:57pm | 03/03/11

NEFFA - why don’t *you* move to Cambodia and see how good you’ve got it. Puts things into perspective eh?
(might make things better here, too)

Glenda Lee says:

03:21pm | 04/03/11

Why should he live with his family Adam??  He’s an adult and has the right to live independently.  No one should be forced to be dependent on their family as adults.

lv says:

12:09pm | 05/03/11

@Glenda Lee - you say “Why should he live with his family Adam??  He’s an adult and has the right to live independently.  No one should be forced to be dependent on their family as adults. “
But why should other people be forced to shoulder the responsibility? Your family IS your responsibility. 
Adam asked a reasonable question, which no one has bothered to answer, about why the OP’s brother is living in a boarding house with alchos and junkies. Not one of you has made a reasonable suggestion about how the problem could be better addressed.
Since when do we all get to absolve ourselves of our responsibilities because they don’t suit us?  So glad people can have a lovely life as a doctor or teacher (well paid professions) and their own families and dump their other family onto the taxpayer to support.

Yet another angry cripple says:

08:23am | 06/03/11

LV - under your rationale - why should I, as a taxpayer, pay for other people’s children to have a public education, and why should I pay for sports ovals I won’t use, and benches on the footpath, or seats on buses - I’m sick of paying taxes for you supposedly non-disabled folk!
You and you family should pay for everything. We should never have tp pay taxes at all - what a scam!!
(for those unable to read sarcasm - this is sarcasm…)

Michael says:

03:08pm | 06/03/11

Lauren, your brother should be elligib le for priority public and afforable housing. depending on the state and territory where he lives he would only be paying 25% of his income on rent - most probably less rent than the rooming house. I was in the same situation on a dsp and in a boarding house with the usual disturbing drunks and now I am in a department of housing apartment in Sydney. Lucky your bro has you for support. Don’t give up

acotrel says:

01:21pm | 03/03/11

Jeff Kennett closed and sold off the mental hospitals in Victoria at a time when they were most needed.  Then he became embarrassed when the cops shot a few ex-patients wielding bread and butter knives.

Lauren J says:

04:05pm | 03/03/11

Adam,

To refer to your points.
1. He lived with my mother who is a single full time working mother, till he was 29 years old. My mother has also suffered physically from caring for my brother over his life.  She was advised when he as 16 years old to start thinking about independent living for him for a number of reasons, but one main one is, what happens when my mother a) dies or b) cant care for him any longer? Secondly to that point my brother is a very independent person, and wants his own life. like any other 33 year old guy does. So these are two reasons as to why he does not live at home.
2.  What sort of care does he want. As he said to me last week,” I want to live with a few people my own age in a share house environment, people with similar disabilities that I can relate to. Where this is assisted care available.” What you need to know Adam is these places are out there but the waiting list is years long.
So basically what he wants is simple enough, not to live with the people he lives with know, because he cant intellectually relate to these people and they cant relate to him. ( the people he has to live with at the moment are recovering drug addicts, alcoholics and severely mentally ill)
My question to you Adam is what you want if you were a guy in his early thirties who had a complex disability, but enough independence to be your own man. Would you want to live with your mum the rest of your OR her life??

Tony of Poorakistan says:

10:15am | 03/03/11

I disagree - let’s scrap immigration and give THAT money to the disabled. Keep the baby bonus and encourage Australians to fill Australia

Jane says:

01:46pm | 06/03/11

@ Angry Carer/ Christina

I feel very sorry for you! Go on Today Tonight and do an expose, then maybe the govt will take some notice…

Good luck!

Angry Cripple says:

12:21pm | 03/03/11

“I suggest the writer is one of those “advocates” who has done a fine job of making a bad system even worse.”

What makes you say this? I sincerely hope I haven’t done anything to make the system worse, and if I have, please let me know what it is so I can not make the mistake again, and possibly rectify whatever it is that I have done to make the system worse.

I don’t think the PC contacted anyone who made submissions, but I’m not sure.  Does anyone know the answer to that?

Rob says:

01:45pm | 03/03/11

Bet you advocate for “mainstreaming” and “desinstitutionalisation” AC?
If you do then I bet that is what the other writer is on about. Mainstreaming our kids has been an utter disaster for most of them. It is soooo good to be able to say my kid is at the local school. Well guess what - he has gone backwards. He no longer gets daily physio, speech therapy or occupational therapy. He no longer has a teacher who understands his highly special needs. The teacher aide is only available to help him 20mins a day. My wife has to go in at lunch time and feed him. We are told all this is an improvement and that his social skills are improving…utter nonsense, He misses his friends and has made no new friends. Thanks a heap.
When he grows up he is still going to be living with us. We have not had a break since he was born because there is nowhere for him to go any more. Yep, all those institutions you hated so much have closed and nothing has replaced them despite all the talk about “care in the community”. We have been told that only those who have absolutely nowhere to go will get a place in the future. We have our name on the respite care list and have been told it might be almost two more years before they can offer us a weekend six times a year.
You know something? We love our kid but we need help and those smart-arsed disability advocates have wiped it off the map with their demands that everything be accessible (whether it bloody well gets used or not) and that all kids go into the mainstream (whether it is the right place for them or not) and that everyone lives in the community (even when they can’t and their families have to give up everything for them). You lot make me sick.
And if the PC did not acknowledge or consult some people about their submissions then they should have - starting with “let’s be heard”. He or she has a very valid point to make.

Angry Cripple says:

02:24pm | 03/03/11

Rob, your bet is wrong. You’re attacking the wrong person, but I hear (and feel) your anger.
I am an advocate. An advocate for choice. I see group homes in the community as essentially “mini-institutions”, without many of the benefits of institutions. They’d be great for some folk with the right supports, but not the way many of them are left to rot now.
People with disability (and their families) should be able to choose how and where they live and are educated, just like people without disability.
And parents should not have to be dead to get respite.

Sue says:

03:39pm | 03/03/11

Yes, you’re right AC. THE PC didn’t contact anyone who made a submission. But each submission received was published on the PC website, and they held a series of public hearings around Australia which people could register to attend.

Single Mum on Carer Payment says:

01:39pm | 03/03/11

HI JF - yes, personal disability insurance is a great idea, but it won’t cover your daughter if she was born with a disability - would you expect govt to only pay for her needs while still a minor? What if she had a severe intellectual disability and needed care for her whole life? This care can easily cost six figures annually. Not many parents could afford that for 70 years.
And I guess the idea of the NDIS is, essentially, compulsory disability insurance, just like Medicare is compulsory medical insurance.
I am glad to hear that you have disability insurance. My guess is that is really only income replacement? The costs of disability can be massive - therapy, home and vehicle modifications, equipment, support staff etc. Please let me know if I have it wrong, but I suspect your insurance only replaces your income, or a portion of it, not all of the other needs.
If you are injured in a car crash and can’t name the other driver, you might be covered, or you might not, dependent on what State you live in.
The NDIS seems to make sense to me. I have two sons with disabilities, neither of whose supports were covered by my disability insurance. After their birth, I had to (in the main) give up work to care for them, and my marriage failed (in no small part due to the stress (financial and emotional) of caring for two small ones with substantial needs. When their father disappeared, I was left with no way to support myself, let alone my two little darlings. I survive Ok on a Carer payment, by living in a cheap place and without any addictions (unless chocolate counts) but my kids don’t get the therapy that could make them contributing members of society as adults. One of them will possibly have to live in supported accommodation, cost the taxpayers a small fortune, whereas with some decent therapy, education and work support, he could maybe hold a real job and live semi-independently.
If I was given support to work (subsidised in-home childcare) I could hold down a “real” job too, and pay taxes. But no. Just this week I was offered two days a week casual work at around $37/hour.
Great! I thought. Casual = flexible = no great boss trauma when I have to be in hospital with a kiddo!
Then I did the maths.
The first $70 a fortnight I earn does not affect the pension. After that, 50 cents in every dollar comes out of my pension.
So - for my first day of work each week, I would “earn” $123, or $16.50/hour and for my second day of work, I would “earn” $93, or $12.40 hour. Take out $45 per afternoon for a nanny (can’t get to speech therapy if they’re at after-school care, and that’s if I can get them into after-school care - many kids with disabilities are only allowed one day per week of afterschool care) and I would get, in my hot little hands, $78 ($10.40/hour) for one day a week work, and $48 for a secnd day a week ($6.40/hour). And that doesn’t include the costs of transport, work clothes etc. (FWIW - I’ve accepted one day a week to make sure that if/when I can get support for my kids I will be equipped to return fulltime to the workforce and be a taxpaying member of society)
Oh boy, what a rant - sorry about that!
I fantasize about being able to go to work each day again. I once had a decent career…

jf says:

02:17pm | 03/03/11

Hi Single Mum

My cover (and my wife’s cover) disability cover include income protection, total and permanent disability and trauma. If I suffer a disability I will be financially self-sufficient.

As to your first point, no I don’t. As I said, I believe that the Government should step in for the genuniely vulnerable. I would classify anyone born with a disability as genuinely vulnerable.

Fair rant and you are precisely my case in point. If those that are able to get their own insurance do, there would be more money left over for your sons. Rest assured that should anything happen to me, I won’t be drawing from the pot available to you. However plenty expect to be entitled to.

Lauren J says:

04:16pm | 03/03/11

Then you really have no idea about disability services. What if you have a child that is born severely disabled?  needs 24 hour full time care? How do you pay for or plan for a life time of care.  It is so easy for you to form an opinion on something and then say’ i have limited knowledge of disability support”  Educate yourself before you just resign yourself to the thought you have everything in your life covered so, therefore it would be fine. 
My mother was given $1500 30 years ago by the hospital my brother was born at because it took them 3 weeks to diagnose his hydrocephalus which then caused him to have 5% vision, and brain damage. Gee why didn’t my 21 year old mother not see that coming….?

jf says:

07:46am | 04/03/11

Lauren J says:04:16pm | 03/03/11

Read my post you raving lunatic.

Particularly “I do think that there would be less money required and/or more money for those genuinely vulnerable people if those that were able organised their own cover, as my wife and I have.”

I am advocating that if people got cover when they were able to, and clearly an unborn child is unable to arrange cover, that there would be more money for kids like your brother.

Fiona says:

09:38am | 04/03/11

JF - are you sure about your disability protection? Sounds to me like a standard policy - in the case of permanent disability it will pay you an income rate. Im assuming that will be used to pay for what your income currently pays for: for mortage payments, standard household bills, food, car paymenst etc.

Will it pay the tens, or even hundreds,  of thousands of dollars you will require to modify your home? Or the hundreds of thousands of dollars should you require 24 hour supported care? The $10 000 or more for wheelchair, the $20,000 for a car modification? The thousands and thousands of dollars spent on intensive therapies that you will require?

I think most people will be very disappointed with what their private disability insurance will provide and will discover very quickly that it is simply not the answer to our terrible disability system.

The system is a disgrace and people spouting this ‘get your own insurance’ line simply have no understanding of the system as it stands, the costs involved in caring for a disabled family member, any idea of how a sustainable and quality system should be designed, structured and funded, and do us all a disservice by diverting attention away from what is a complete and utter failure of government at all levels to prooperly provide and care for the severly disabled in our community.

jf says:

10:22am | 04/03/11

I’m 100% positive Fiona. In the event of my temporary disability, I will have 75% of my income as well as 100% of my super contributions paid. Should I suffer a permanent disability, I will be paid a lump sum of $2m. In the event that I suffer cancer, or heart attack or 50 other disabilities I will get a $400,000 lump sum plus my income replaced as above for as long as I am unable to work. If I die, my family will get about $2m.

I could have arranged more or less if I wished but gave this careful consideration (with the help of professional) and it is based on the “hundreds of thousands of dollars” I will require should I need “24 hour supported care” and the “$10,000 or more for wheelchair, the $20,000 for a car modification” and the “thousands and thousands of dollars spent on intensive therapies” that I will require.

I have this cover and protection because I took the time and effort to think about it and take out the cover. It costs a bit, but, as my mortgage decreases, my super grows and my kids get older my need will decrease. I also pay for most of it from my superannuation fund as every Australian can.

If I’m not prepared to pay for my own protection, why should I expect anyone else to?
“I think most people will be very disappointed with what their private disability insurance will provide and will discover very quickly that it is simply not the answer to our terrible disability system”

Well, they should do something about it. There are so many ways of doing this that it is ridiculous.

“people spouting this ‘get your own insurance’ line simply have no understanding of the system as it stands, the costs involved in caring for a disabled family member, any idea of how a sustainable and quality system should be designed, structured and funded, and do us all a disservice by diverting attention away from what is a complete and utter failure of government at all levels to prooperly provide and care for the severly disabled in our community”

Why? Why should those that are able to get cover be compensated for their own failures. Insurance is freely available to everyone over the age of 18.

And, before you, or anyone else fails to get my point, I am advocating that anyone under 18 or anyone who is over 18 and is unable to get personal cover should have a safety net.

To be clear, I am not suggesting for a moment that the truly vulnerable shouldn’t be covered by the tax payer because they didn’t have insurance. If someone was unable for whatever reason to get insurance, then they should have a safety net. The more that people that are able to get cover elect not to, because of hubris or because they are not prepared to pay the premiums, the less of the safety net will be available to those that truly need it. Those born with disabilities or who suffer disabilities before they are able to arrange personal cover. 

The disgrace in the system is the scabs expecting everyone else to pay for their own failings. The disgrace is that the genuinely needy and the genuinely vulnerable have less available to them because of the inability of others to take personal responsibility.

Fiona says:

12:13pm | 04/03/11

The call for an NDIS is the recognition that the current system of disability support in this country is completely broken. Even for those who have the means to pay for expensive personal insurance – the system itself just simply isn’t there. We cannot build a comprehensive, fair and equitable system without taking the decision to commit taxpayer dollars to it. There is a reason why the PRODUCTIVITY commission was asked to conduct this study. If you took the time to read the report, you would see that besides the fundamental issue of human rights and dignity for the disabled, this report is about the economics of caring for the disabled. The suggested model is seen as a long term, prudent and sustainable economic model.

Im not sure if the ‘scabs’ you are talking about are those people with severe disabilities, and their carers, who have struggled for years under the current system, but I must admit I am struggling to understand the psychology behind people such as yourself who take time out of their day to write and argue AGAINST the needs of basically one of the marginalised groups on society – the disabled. Im not sure exactly what you think it is that the disabled and their carers are asking for - do you think that the severly disabled are asking to live it up in style, rolling around in mountains of tax-payer dollars?

If it makes you feel better to describe these people as scabs – well, I’m at a loss. Perhaps you could devote some of this time and energy to exposing the actions of the wealthy who routinely practise tax-avoidance through a variety of legal and less-than-legal means. 

As the carer of a severely disabled child who struggles daily with this terrible system, I must admit that I feel really, really angry at you and people who think like you. This is such an important issue and we are trying to enact some real societal change here for the people we love, and I cannot understand why you would focus on such a side issue as personal insurance, and not the massive elephant in the room which is that for years and years, our taxes have been WASTED in a discriminatory and unfair system and people have been left to rot. My child is being left to rot – it makes me ANGRY that there are people like yourself that just don’t care and instead wish to devote time and energy to painting us as scabs and leeches. Shame shame shame on you and everyone who thinks like you – and I hope for your sake that every member of your family, your extended family, your friends, your friends kids, your kids their friends and so on all have the means to pay for private insurance and that you never ever have to suffer the grief that comes every day with operating in this disgraceful system.

jf says:

01:41pm | 04/03/11

For Christ’s sake Fiona, I am agreeing with you. I can’t imagine what you are taking out of my posts.
Please, stop, take the emotion (as understandable as it is) out of the discussion and read my posts.
“Even for those who have the means to pay for expensive personal insurance – the system itself just simply isn’t there. We cannot build a comprehensive, fair and equitable system without taking the decision to commit taxpayer dollars to it.”
I agree. And if you took the time to read my post, you would understand that the essence of my comments is that those who are able to cover themselves (and I include affordability in that) should. I also agree that it requires taxpayer dollars. The more people that those people who are able to cover themselves do so the more taxpayer dollars available to those genuinely needy. If anything were to happen to me, I would not need to take any of those taxpayer dollars and more would therefore be available for those genuinely needy and vulnerable.
“Im not sure if the ‘scabs’ you are talking about are those people with severe disabilities, and their carers, who have struggled for years under the current system, but I must admit I am struggling to understand the psychology behind people such as yourself who take time out of their day to write and argue AGAINST the needs of basically one of the marginalised groups on society – the disabled. Im not sure exactly what you think it is that the disabled and their carers are asking for - do you think that the severly disabled are asking to live it up in style, rolling around in mountains of tax-payer dollars?”
No I don’t. Did you even read my posts? I am writing for the marginalized groups and against those that abuse the system. Absolutely nowhere did I suggest that the marginalized and genuinely needy shouldn’t be helped. In fact, the opposite; I believe that the marginalized and vulnerable are the very people who should be supported and that there would be more available from whatever pot there is if those that were able to provide for themselves id. The scabs that I am referring to are those that are abusing the support that the marginalized and vulnerable (like you and your son) need. If every citizen relied on taxpayer money to fund them in the event of a disability it would be financially unsustainable. Have a look at how much money was claimed in disability cover from insurance companies and add this to the cost of this system. The net result is that the genuinely needy and vulnerable would have less.
The scabs that I am referring to are those that are wealthy enough to pay for cover and don’t because they expect other people to pay for them.
“As the carer of a severely disabled child who struggles daily with this terrible system, I must admit that I feel really, really angry at you and people who think like you.”
Why? Let me tell you a story. I have a friend. He comes from a wealthy family and is himself quite wealthy. Last year he had an accident, broke his neck and is now paralysed form the chest down. He needed a considerable amount of money to pay for his treatment, to make changes to his house and to now pay for ongoing care. His wife and children have had to make considerable adjustments to their lives. Fortunately, he had a considerable amount of TPD cover and is self-supported. Are you suggesting that my friend should have been supported by the taxpayer?

If so, I am in violent disagreement with you. He was a healthy and wealthy middle aged man with sufficient financial resources to pay for his disability cover. His financial needs are now significant and, because he took responsibility for himself, he is self-funded – that is, not taking anything from the finite and insufficient pot that you are relying on.
I feel for you and your child and agree that more needs to be done. I would love it if you could point out where I said that a child born with or who suffers a disability should be supported by the taxpayer and where I said they were scabs. It is those people that are taking advantage of the system, and taking from you and your child, that I was referring to as scabs.
Personal insurance isn’t a side issue. It is very much part of the solution. For, if those that are able to take care of themselves do, then there is more left for the genuinely vulnerable like you and your child.

Asrael says:

10:35am | 04/03/11

Hi L,
I know what you mean.  A friend in the ACT years ago told me he was told to divorce his wife of over 30 years so the government could pick up the tab for her MS. Needless to say he refused. I would have hoped things had moved on from then. (1994). You have my best wishes and sympathy. Your husband too.

pete m says:

04:31pm | 03/03/11

How does an unborn baby with downs syndrome obtain income protection insurance?

Eye4anEye says:

05:42pm | 03/03/11

They obviously don’t - they would receive whatever the current system allows and the childs parents/family witho whatever charitable help is available provide everyhing else.

Does the scenario suck? you bet it does but again IMO it beats dragging everyones standard of living down to provide more than the basics to an unlucky minority.

Again this is just my opinion but I feel families should look after their own beyond basic living allowance supported provided by the rest of society.

For example my grandparents survive on a pension this is enough for the to live on but do very little else - as a result of this I and other members of my family provide them with luxary items/non essesntials. We take them out for meals, we purchase furnishings, we treat them to trips to the movies/ local pubs and the like. This is my and my families responsibility and again IMO it is not our responsibility beyond paying taxes which (should) fund (basic) social security programs to provide these things to others.

In the event of babies born with disabilties I have alot of sympathy (one of my nephews died shortly after birth due to in his case terminal disabilites). Had he survived I would experct the government to pay his basic necesaties in the form of a disabilty pension and everything else to be provided by my Brother, myself our parents/inlaws etc.

I realise the sad thing is some families would not be willing to do this - maybe there in lies the problem with individuals and families passing their responsibilites onto the government who can’t and shouldn’t have to fill those roles.

sorry for the length of my post - complex issue that requires alot of explaination for my viewpoint (which I’m still unsure I expressed well).

The Even Angrier Disabled Person. says:

09:05am | 04/03/11

hey, E4E, you sound to me like you have absolutely no empathy for the disabled, you seem to be basing your opinions on how much the disabled cost YOU in taxes…why dont you, and your ilk just be honest and say that you support Euthanasia for anyone not fit to work and pay taxes, because thats where your bean counting logic will lead you, in the long run.Its been done before, The Nazi party didnt start with the Jews, they started with the institutionalised disabled, Google it if you dont believe me.

EvenAngrierDisabledPerson says:

09:57am | 04/03/11

well said, Fiona…unfortunately, the world is run by miserable, soul less accountants,. and psychopatchic sociopaths like Eye4anEye. “The Love of money is the root of all evil” I dont believe in any particular religion, but that phrase rings so true for me.

Eye4anEye says:

12:59pm | 04/03/11

Yep I’m a selfish person I don’t deny it (I’ve found most people are and a lot of them more so than myself). Are you not being selfish asking people to give up resources to support you/your child? I think you are I also don’t blame you for it it’s natural. Just a philosophical question for you: when people give to charity is it truly charity or are they buying that good feeling you get when you donate? (I honestly don’t know in regards to myself anymore after that thought came to me I can’t tell).

That doesn’t stop my opinion from having some validity. My opinion is use funds for greatest efficiency so that more people are helped by those funds. I have also spent more than 10 minutes in a children’s hospital when my nephew died of heart and lung failure so why don’t you keep your uninformed personal assumptions out of the discussion.

I’m not saying there’s not a great deal of crappy tragic things going on in the world - I’m just saying logically we can’t solve them all and IMO we should use resources as efficiently as we can to better society as a whole.

As to your euthanasia discussion since you brought it up I’ll voice my opinion on that as well. My opinion is that people should have the right to choose if they want to die and have that choice honoured - I do not believe that choice should be made for those incapable of making it….... but again thanks for making an assumption of how I think and feel.

@Angrierdisabled person - appreciate you labelling me a “psychopathic sociopath” but your opinion means very little to me - I don’t know you, I don’t want to know you and the people who do know me don’t hold that opinion of me.

jf says:

12:12pm | 05/03/11

Hopefully Fiona you understand the difference between this guy’s view and mine.

Whilst I absolutely believe in personal accountability and that everyone who is able to should have adequate insurance.

However, I also believe that society, community and government should endeavour to care for those that were unable to get cover.

By and large, I would like the Government to tax less however concede that there are some things that the government must look after that private enterprise can’t.

Just as government must provide the infrastructure that private enterprise can’t, so must they care for those people that can’t care for themselves.

I can think of very few better or more efficient reasons for distributing government (tax payer) money than to help those truly vulnerable. I can think of few worse uses of public money that taking it out of the pocket of a rich person and then giving it straight back because they have a disability. Or encouraging a moral hazard in supporting those who should take care of their own means to the disadvantage of those that are genuinely needy.

Fiona says:

10:52pm | 05/03/11

JF, thanks fo your replies and yes, I certaily do understand the differing viewpoint you are coming from. I hear what you’ve said and whilst I understand your viewpoint I still differ, especially as we are trying to generate a groudswell of support for tis scheme in the comunity and I think some of this takes away and diverts attention fronm thecore issues. I also happen to believe that there should be universal care for thedisabled,no matter their circumstances pre disability. Could discuss this more but it’s late, and m typing from stupid damn ‘smart’ phone and cat bear the typos…..!

jf says:

09:44am | 06/03/11

“support for tis scheme in the comunity and I think some of this takes away and diverts attention fronm thecore issues”

Good luck Fiona. I sincerely hope that you do get more support from the community and the Governments for those that genuinely need support.

However, I fear that if what you are aiming for is a universal scheme that it will never get off the ground or will be utterly inadequate for those that truly need it.

As you say, the financial support required for people who are disabled is huge. If you add the cost of supporting my me, my wife, my friend and anyone else who should reasonably be expected to support themselves, you add to the cost of the scheme to the extent that it becomes, economically, politically and financially unviable.

Alternatively, even if more money is able to be directed towards supporting people with disabilities, where too much money is never enough, you and your child will be drawing from a smaller pot because people who should have been supporting themselves are drawing from the same pot as you.

Angry Cripple says:

10:13pm | 03/03/11

Mum? Is that you? How did you know it was me!!!???