Top Scoops

Book Reviews | Gordon Campbell | Scoop News | Wellington Scoop | Community Scoop | Search

 

Report highlights discriminatory disabled care system

Hundreds of people who care for their adult disabled children have told the government what they already know, that the current system is unfair, unlawful and discriminatory.

The much-anticipated report into the Funded Family Care system showed parents were opposed to being employed by their disabled child and they want a greater say in how they spent the money they got from the government and not be constrained by a myriad of rules.

It also suggests spouses, partners and civil union partners should be eligible for Funded Family Care, because they are trusted and provide safe care.

And it called for carers to be paid a living income for their work as full-time carers because they are unable to find other work.

"I actually don't want to be a family carer. But there is just no other safe choices," one person said.

"No one will take her for care, even for respite and yet I am expected to do all those health cares myself. I've had no training" another said.

"There is general agreement that no one should be paid caring 24/7 and they should be supported in other ways, but access to quality and safe community supports and respite is often not available.

"People felt that the current Funded Family Care policy disincentives multiple carers, and the flexibility makes it more difficult."

But despite spelling out the problems of the current system, it contains no recommendations or suggested courses of action.

It is the third report commissioned since 2012 into problems with the Funded Family Care system. Despite this, there has been very little change.

The report was commissioned by the government in September after it announced plans to change the Funded Family Care policy.

The report writers - Jo Esplin, Tammy Hambling, and Rebecca Rippon - received 922 responses to an online survey and interviewed 22 individuals and groups.

But due to the tight timeframe, they were unable to talk to all the people and groups they wanted to and suggested the Ministry find ways to resolve this.

Families reported feeling that the current rules and systems left them with little choice and no flexibility to use the system as they needed to.

"This does not mean requiring more funds, but rather being able to use them in a meaningful way that supports the disabled person and the family carer best", the report said.

The report noted that there were two common themes, the ability to pay others at times and greater flexibility about when they accessed funds.

"Just give us the money and let us get on with it, get rid of all the red tape," one person told the writers.

"These systems create undue and unnecessary stress for people already under stress," another said.

Pay spouses or carers

The current FFC policy excludes spouses, partners and civil union partners from being paid. Of the 680 people who were asked that question in the online survey, 92 percent answered 'yes'.

The assessment and allocation process is flawed.

To receive FFC there is an assessment process for eligibility and to determine the number of hours a week a family member can be paid for. That includes tasks a carer might undertake, the needs of the person being cared for and a range of other factors.

Overall people felt that the 40 hour cap, irrelevant of need, was very unfair. The report writers were repeatedly told to move away from a tasked base minute assessment.

Suggestions for improvement included:

• Rather than an hours based system, offer a package based system of bands which represent the level of need.

• Have a minimum number of set hours, that can be built on depending on need.

• One person suggested a minimum of 60 hours per week, as this would give a living wage based on across seven days of care per week, rather than five days.

The Minister of Health has been contacted for comment.


© Scoop Media

 
 
 
Top Scoops Headlines

 

Gordon Campbell: On The Brexit Vote Aftermath

So, what happens next? Normally when a major policy like this gets so crushingly rejected – by 230 votes, when Theresa May had reportedly been hoping for a defeat by “only” 70- 100 votes – the PM would resign and/or a fresh election called. More>>


Gordon Campbell: On Our History Of Selling Out The Kurds

For the past 100 years, the West has sold out the Kurds over and over again. So much so that it came as a surprise yesterday when US National Security advisor John Bolton appeared to walk back the latest act of betrayal... More>>

ALSO:

Gordon Campbell: On The Reactionary Politics Of Fear

What do you call a situation where the state tries to create panic among its own people for party political gain? As practiced by Theresa May and her faction of the Conservative Party, this has become a well-honed form of state terrorism… More>>

Viva Scoop 3.0! Rounding Up 2018 And Looking Ahead

2018 has been quite a year for Scoop. We are so thrilled to have successfully met the funding target for the first stage of the ‘Scoop 3.0’ plan raising $36,000. This means we can now proceed with the planning phase for the delivery of this bold vision for a community-owned, participatory, independent newsroom... More>>

ALSO:

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  • PublicAddress
  • Pundit
  • Kiwiblog