Posts by Rosemary McDonald
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Access: Right to die?, in reply to Moz,
Agreed...we all have the right to die.
So why all the fuss?
The debate? The moralising?
Because, as soon as one person says, " I can't see how three people providing round the clock care is a good use of anyone's time.".... that veiwpoint is out there.
You may be of the the opinion that you would rather be dead than dependant....but what are you implying about those who are dependant?
Not explicitly....but by default?
And yes....every discussion about this issue has the morally superior stating " I would not want to be a burden etc.etc., the decent thing to do would be to die."
I provide round the clock care for someone who under ACC would indeed be entitled to at least tthree full time carers.
No ACC, no entitlement to funding....just me, who has it in writing, from the government, that what I do is worthless and of no value.
The person who is dependant on me?
He tells me he has a good life.
Moz....this is a very personal issue, I respect that, but please read what Martin wrote, and take on board that many people with disabilities (and their loved ones) have very real and well founded fears about so called 'voluntary' euthanasia while there is no secure place for disabled in our society....yet.
-
Firstly...thank you Martin for this post.
The voices of those who have lived with conditions that others consider unbearable MUST be heard in this debate.
Secondly, before we legislate for the 'right to die'...we must legislate for the right to live.
ALL life must be valued...not just the able, the fit, the well.
When 45% of those surveyed... "supported doctor-assisted suicide for people who were neither in pain nor had an incurable disease but who were permanently and completely dependent on others for their physical needs. " ,
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/3514439/Catholic-concern-over-right-to-die
and we have Moz stating that " I just can't see how three people proving round the clock moz-care is a good use of anyone's time.."
methinks there are very good reasons to be concerned that perhaps the value of the lives of those who require a high level of care are yet to be recognised.
At the risk of belabouring a comparison....when we speak about cost, being a burden, contributing little to the community or even basic human dignity....why are the right to die brigade not advocating for recidivist criminals to be given the right to end their lives?
Surely, members of this group have times when guilt and remorse overwhelm them and death seems the better option?
It is the case now that some doctors make personal judgements on the value of a disabled persons life and will refuse treatment...it happens...here in Godzone.
It is the case now that those with high care needs are made to feel worthless by government policy and legislation.
It is the case now that those with high care needs NOT under ACC have no entitlement to funded care....they get funded care at the whim, or not, of a NASC bureaucrat.
There should be absolutely NO debate on 'doctor assisted suicide' until we have legislation in place that ensures those with disabilities have equal rights and equal status as all other New Zealanders.
-
Here's the Employment Court judgment....http://www.justice.govt.nz/courts/employment-court/documents/2015-judgments/2015-nzempc-24-lowe-v-director-general-of-health-ministry-of-health-ors-judgment-of-the-full-court-2-march-2015
Interesting that the Court states..."It is inherent in the statutory framework that the Ministry and the C&CDHB were required to provide health and disability services in some manner; they had the ultimate responsibility of ensuring such services were delivered."
(Note the use of the words "required" and "responsibility".)
When the brandspanking new version of the Public Health and Disability Act says....
"and to affirm the principle that, in the context of the funding of support services, families generally have primary responsibility for the well-being of their family members."
http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2013/0022/latest/whole.html
Now, (and I may have been out in the hot sun for too long), we appear to have the Employment Court (bless them) saying the Ministry is 'responsible' and the PHDAct(2) saying that families are responsible.
Since MOST unpaid carers are family, and the Carer Support Subsidy is allocated on the basis of unpaid care provided by the (usually) family carer, then methinks the Government response to this EC judgment will be to flick the whole shebang back to the unpaid carer who hired the relief carer...and paid them below minimum wage....because, according to the government we (family carers) are the ones who are responsible (from a funding perspective) for the care of our disabled loved ones.
Yup...too long in the hot sun.
As a serious footnote.
Peter and I spent ten years providing care(in our own home) for a number of disabled children....usually with high/complex care needs.
We were paid the daily Carer Support Subsidy rate of $75 per 24 hours of care.
We accepted this gratefully.
The reward came from knowing what a valuable service we were providing for the parents of these children...as well as the children themselves.
It was no small thing that they were( as children with significant physical disabilities) spending the weekend( or week) with a family where one of the parents also had a significant disability.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Angela Hart,
It is probably worth having a look at the Carer Support Subsidy.
Here....http://www.health.govt.nz/system/files/documents/pages/how-to-claim-carer-support-09.pdf
"This service offers the full-time carer a break by
contributing to the cost of an alternative carer."NB!!!!...... " contributing". NOT "funding the entire cost"
The Miserly has always been very clear on this....Carer Support Subsidy is just that...a subsidy.
Methinks this is another battle the Misery will win.
Everything Angela says is spot on....Carer Support is about as much use as a chocolate teapot...and woe betide those who follow the advice (as stated in the above publication)
"If you are unclear about how you can use your Carer
Support, please contact the person or agency who has
allocated your Carer Support."..... in case you end up as one of the many, many carers who have followed the advice of the NASCs to be "creative".
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/3418235/Care-support-fraud-hits-1-million -
Thank you, Marilyn Waring, for remembering those of us who count for nothing.
http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/20169982
Marilyn Waring made a point of singling out this particular case.The process was followed, and the assholes in the Beehive not only made the discrimination legal, but removed the right for ANY further complaint.
This shitty piece of legislation was passed on the 17th May 2013.
Peter and I are thinking about marking the second anniversary of this Act....somehow.
We suggested to Catherine Delahunty that something should be done on the first anniversary...but she chose to consult with DPA NZ....and guess what?
Nothing.
If Peter and I have to (yet again) do something on our own....we will.
But, it would be nice to have some support.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand’s…, in reply to Martin Sullivan,
Indeed some of us sat outside the studios with signs
.....
Respect for that Martin....but where oh where did that spirit of activism go?
When Peter and I made our wee stand at the Health and Disability conference last year, demanding that providers who kill face criminal charges, we expected to be standing alone.
It is somewhat tragic that that is the case.
I commented elsewhere about people posting and commenting annonymously.
Hard to take someone seriously when they hide behind a pseudonym.
"But...we have jobs, positions of power, responsibilities, families, reputations and incomes to protect....".
(With the unsaid rider that, being a nobody with nothing to lose, I wouldn't understand.)
I do understand the Salinger/Joy effect....speak out and get slammed....but the respect those people earned has much greater worth than any establishment approval.
When Peter and I stood there with our signs, challenging the Commision and the disability "establishment" to demand that providers who neglect to death disabled people in their care face criminal charges, we were completely ignored by the 'noters". (Until Tariana gave her stamp of approval.)
What? We were seen as a joke?
An embarrasment to the 'community"?
Ignore us and we'd go away?
Ho hum.
-
Southerly: This Week in Parliament: 26…, in reply to ,
This is the same Russel who extended the hand of friendship to the Gnats a few days before the election, only to get the big slap down? Cost you some of the market share there Russel, old chap.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand's…, in reply to Joe Wylie,
"equating the psychopaedic nurses of yesteryear with concentration camp guards seems utterly horrible."
Until someone pops up with a better response, and to keep the issue alive, I would have to offer that it would only take a small number of bad apples, and enough of the good one's remaining silent, to give the very real perception to some that indeed the nurses were 'guards'.
This applies today, in the disability field. Shit is happening to some that need care, and others( also in the system) fail to speak up.
This is well documented today. (I, or someone else, can post links to publications that prove this).
And years down the track, when the history is written, those real stories of neglect and abuse at the hands of state funded carers will be lost because the insiders are writing the history and command the narrative.
Many evils can be hidden in plain sight.
-
Access: Some aspects of New Zealand's…, in reply to Joe Wylie,
Seriously, part of me is still spewing over that vile piece of fantasy. Self-serving nonsense like that only degrades PAS.
Joe, I only know what I've read...and occasionally there is a hint that there are unmarked graves at the Kimberly site.
I would also like to see more evidence, or have a former resident/staff accounts properly investigated.
Kimberly was a horrorshow for some residents, and I don't believe there is enough in the way of available publications that tell those stories.
It must be acknowledged that those former residents are from a section in our society who are routinely dismissed and their veracity undermined.
Then, and now.
-
Access: Family Carers Case – Five Years On, in reply to Sacha,
Sacha, I got there through the link I posted in my previous comment....