In the argy bargy that has accompanied the introduction of the National Disability insurance Scheme (NDIS), particularly in Western Australia; you would be forgiven for imagining that either of the following two scenarios would apply:

1.   WA’s disability system is the Rolls Royce of systems and there is nothing that is a shortcoming in the treatment of people with disabilities and/or

2.   The NDIS will provide the answers to all the questions that may be asked about people with disabilities.

So what is the truth?

DISABILITY2We have a lot to concern ourselves about in regard to the treatment of people with disabilities. Let’s just look at some of the issues that have arisen in recent times that cause me to raise some questions herein. Let us just list a few of these:

1.   A young girl who is vision impaired is asked to surrender her white cane at a rock concert. This caused the girl more than simply the physical angst that was associated but also caused a great deal of mental anguish to her.

2.   A young man who went to the cricket was asked to surrender his cutlery even though it was essential that he be able to cut his food into manageable bite size pieces.

3.   A doctor in Horsham who has been a 457 visa holder for a number of years is denied permanent residency in Australia because his son has a disability and in the words of the Department of Immigration and Citizenship, will be a ”burden” on Australian society if he was allowed to stay.

4.   Another doctor who had his visa application denied for ostensibly the same reason as above because of a diagnosis of cancer having been given to his wife.

5.   The provision by one of the WA Ministers of a letter to a blind colleague in a PDF format which was not able to be read by her “blind” software despite her indicating this to the staff at the ministerial office.

6.   A blind woman was refused service when she entered a cafe accompanied by her guide dog, and was told she would only be served if she sat outside.

7.   A lawyer’s application for income protection insurance was refused when she disclosed she had once experienced depression.  This refusal was despite the fact she had not taken any time off work because of her impairment in 10 years.

8.   A real estate agent refused the rental application of an accountant who used a wheelchair, because the agent believed she would not be able to pay the rent and maintain the property because of her impairment.

9.   The parents of a young boy complained their son had been discriminated against because shortly after being told he was autistic, his child care provider would no longer let him attend the creche.

10.   An employee of a travel agency refused to accept a booking made on behalf of a person with a disability. She did this without asking the nature or extent of the disability.

The examples listed above from 6 to 10 are taken from the WA Equal Opportunity Commission’s website as the examples of impairment discrimination that have been brought to the attention of the commission.  In the most recent annual report of the Commission, discrimination on the grounds of impairment continues to be the most common closely followed by discrimination on the grounds of race.

The purpose of listing the occurrences above is not to highlight the particular issues that may have arisen in each of those cases but to emphasise that there is still considerable work to be done in the area. When you then overlay the misinformation and the prevailing attitudes of exclusion with a race or Non English Speaking Background (NESB) you are now presented with a person who may have two of the significant discrimination grounds listed above. Therefore the logical conclusion to be drawn from the above is that there is a considerable amount of educational work that remains to be done. Recognising that people with disabilities also have ABILITIES, might be a good starting point. Of course, to bridge cultural factors that go to the issues of exclusion and ostracism is another skill set that very few in the upper echelons of government possess. This emphasises the very great need for intervention and education strategies that are culturally appropriate.

So in answering the question posed above about the disability strategies of the western Australian government and that of the NDIS, the conclusion that can be drawn is that there is much to be done in society to recognise the issues involved.  Until our attitudes to people with disability change neither of the two systems (the West Australian one and the NDIS) is going to be particularly successful.