Posts by Rosemary McDonald
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to Sacha,
given that the announcement was consistently presented as being about research rather than income support or service eligibility.
Hmmm...maybe not the right place to talk about this as this post is about RNZ's ratings. Suffice to say, that other media articles did actually talk about service provision, in terms of better health outcomes for those with the complex needs that arise from a spinal cord impairment.
Also, the 'journalist' used the terms "injury" and "injured" consistently in the piece when the Registry's actual title is The New Zealand Spinal Cord Impairment Registry.
Born out of the New Zealand Spinal Cord Impairment Action Plan 2014 - 2019, the end result of the Joint ACC/MOH national Spinal Cord Impairment (SCI) initiative.
Also, it appears that there was a orchestrated attempt to keep non ACC spinal impaired away from this event that theoretically (unless the RNZ 'journalist' knows something that we don't) includes those who become spinal cord impaired because of a non injury event.
The RNZ 'journalist' only spoke to those 'officially' invited spinal impaired attendees, ALL of whom are ACC clients. He could have spoke to the guy in the wheelchair holding the sign saying "MOH Spinal Impaired....We Shouldn't Have To Beg" and found out that even though his high level Spinal Cord Impairment was caused by an accident 45 1/2 years ago, he was there trying to be the voice of all those trying to live with a Spinal Cord Impairment under the Misery of Health.
Just trying to jump the narrative back on track...
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to izogi,
considering that not turning up at all gives opposing voices free reign.
izogi...that link goes to my playlist at RNZ...how did that happen?
-
I'm one of the guilty, perhaps, for getting into this issue on The Standard last night, so I won't sully this by repeating my rant.
However, as a commenter on TS posted this morning...Fox took exactly the opposite stance on Clark's bid for higher office on Waatea News back in April.
IMHO...Fox is acting like a true politician....showing a flexible set of principals, changing according to whatever controls the political climate.
It would be absolutely awesome to have a New Zealander heading up the UN...especially one with a proven track record for consistently and intelligently speaking out on the factors that keep the world in conflict. Primarily, inequality and gender discrimination.
My vote would go to Marilyn Waring.
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to Sacha,
Yes, it was listening to that particular Natrad piece that prodded me to make my comment above.
We got up at four in the morning to be present at what we suspected was going to be another happy- clappy -this- is- all-good event.
We might have well not bothered.
Does acting as the Government's paid advertising provider make Natrad a commercial station?
Blurred lines....
-
Hard News: Understanding the Audiences, in reply to izogi,
Hopefully it also puts a dent in Ministers’ ability to to avoid showing up on RNZ programmes with the excuse of preferring to go where the audiences are.
If I may tweak that a little....
"Hopefully it will ensure that RNZ shows up when the Ministers are star performers in a launch of a seemingly positive initiative."
Such as....yesterday's gala launch of the NZ Spinal Injury Registry.
Himself and I were there by the way, holding a quiet, two person protest on behalf of the 40% of those living with Spinal Cord Impairment (yes, impairment, not injury as the header would suggest) who are not under ACC.
I have emailed the journalist, and our continued support of Natrad (and hence a small impact on their ratings) may just depend on his response.
Or he may chose to simply ignore my email in favour of not upsetting the Paymasters....we wouldn't want to disrupt the delivery of the official narrative, now would we?
-
The Court of Appeal decision for Ministry of Health v Lowe.
Unsurprisingly, the Appeal Court has found that the Miserly and the DHBs did not engage as Lowe as a relief carer and therefore are not responsible for the fact that Lowe was paid way less than the minimum wage for providing care for a person with a disability so that the full time unpaid carer (usually resident family member) can take a break.
No, no....it is not the funder who can be held responsible...but arguably the fulltime, unpaid family carer.
"On the facts of this case, neither the Ministry nor the DHB has any role in
selecting the relief carer and until the claim form is submitted do not even know their
identity. Nor do they have any involvement in arranging the timing, nature or extent
of the support to be provided or where it is to be provided. Those matters are within
the sole discretion of the full time carer, who makes all the arrangements.The full
time carer would be free, for example, to select an organisation such as a rest home
provider rather than an individual like Ms Lowe. "and....
"The disabled person and/or their full-time carers have the choice over who
provides informal Carer Support services and so are responsible for the type
and quality of support received."I do not have the time to properly look into this...but on the surface it appears to be another example of perhaps where the lawyers/judges lack of lived experience of how a particular scheme actually works in the real world has enable the Ministry of Health's carefully constructed narrative to prevail.
-
Speaker: The Uncomfortable Silence, in reply to ,
What I definitely do know is that grief never leaves
Give me a time machine.
Dial back forty three years and let me tell my father....don't.
Please, don't.
-
Access: Fighting seclusion with…, in reply to Angela Hart,
What can you say?
The current Strategy, published in April (the 1st, perhaps) 2001 by the Ministry of Health is looking like the better option.
Clear Objectives, with sub categories, that had They actually had a true and honest commitment to it would have seen real and measurable improvements in the lives of disabled New Zealanders over the past 15 years.
Tied to honouring the Convention (perhaps I should provide a definition of "honour"?) we would now be ticking off the 'wins', rather than licking our wounds over the losses.
NO mention of the Optional Protocol in the Draft....Goodness me, surely that is part of the work that DPA NZ Inc was being funded for, and it is not even on the 'to do' list?
Hmmm...as I have probably said before, the only time I've seen the current Strategy held up as a meaningful document, constructed in good faith and real intention was in the Atkinson case. The plaintiffs argued (and the Tribunal agreed) that the Strategy was supposed to be taken at its word. (I'm paraphrasing here...) The assumption was that the Ministry of Health published it with true sincerity.
The fact that the Misery ( and the Gummint) reacted to that assumption like cornered feral cats kinda says it all.
P.S. It used to be possible to look up the Annual Returns of DPA NZ and Carers NZ on the Charities Commission website, but they appear to have disappeared. Just wanted to see how much Gummint funding these two 'peak bodies' were getting to take the concerns of disabled Kiwis and their family carers to the Powers That Be.
-
FWIW, here's the Draft NZ Disability Strategy...
24 pages of aspirational twaddle.
They have done to the Disability Strategy what they did to the Carers Strategy a few years ago.
Oh, well. At least the PLODS have produced something to justify their salaries...
-
Access: Fighting seclusion with…, in reply to Angela Hart,
I weep
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/world/asia/knife-japan-stabbing-sagamihara.html?_r=0
“My aim is a world where people with multiple disabilities who have extreme difficulty living at home or being active in society can be euthanized with the consent of their guardians,”
And you know what?
As gutsmackingly awful as that is, I really do believe that there are some/many within the NZ Government (MPs and various Ministries) who hold the same views.