Chapter 3 Yesterday CBC TV took up Graham Burke’s story of his fight for the scooter he needs – Kangaroo Court on TV. Mr. Burke’s right side paralysis makes walking difficult. He was prescribed a scooter by a licensed occupational therapist. The Disability Support Program refused to provide the assistive device and he appealed to their Kangaroo Court.
When a court circumvents normal rules of procedure in a rush to justice, real justice is perverted in the process. This is the third review attended but the first to end in a flurry of lies and accusations. I’m not sure it really ended, more lunch time came and the review had become a brawl – Kangaroo Court.
Section 17.5 of the DSP Policy says the purpose of the DSP Review Process is to examine the actions taken by the Department of Social Services and Seniors, and make a finding regarding adherence to the DSP policy and work processes. The Chair of the DSP Provincial Review Committee stated at the outset that they were only looking at procedure. That’s like a trial where the judge is only allowed to decide if the ticket or warrant for your arrest was filled out properly. If it was, you’re guilty – that’s Kangaroo Court justice.
Related Stories
Kangaroo Court, 2
Burke DSP Review Kangaroo Court
Daniel into lions den
PEI approves scooters
250 scooters needs
We did review the evidence. Despite having the DSP supervisor impugn the actions of occupational therapists, we covered the facts. The DSP supervisor was doing a tell at this point, like Pinocchio’s nose when he told a lie. His nose would grow longer and longer until he embarrassed himself. In her case a nervous rash spread up her neck and across her face. Why? She was going to tell a big lie, the big lie. Here’s what she said (all block quotes are hers)
OT’s are excellent. The DSP can’t meet everyone’s needs. When the client has a preference for a scooter OT will recommend a scooter even if it is wrong.
I asked ‘Are you questioning the skill and competence of all occupational therapists or just these two.’
‘We are trying to learn how occupational therapists work and beginning to understand them.’
Both statements are lies or prevarications. The DSP has been working with occupational therapists since it started in 2001. They are the only ones that can, by regulation, prescribe most of the assistive devices funded by this program.
‘We had two occupational therapist assessments for Mr. Burke. We thought he was positive about the one for a wheelchair. We had two different OT assessments and we went with the second, the power wheelchair.’
This is another lie since the DSP only had the one OT assessment on December 7th, 2006 when Graham was rejected. The second assessment, a backup plan to this Kangaroo Court, is dated two months later February 6, 2007.
Just like Peter denied Jesus three times, Chester Gillan denied the $1 million cutback 3 times in the Legislature and the DSP denied the truth three times.
I asked ‘Did you have two assessments on December 7th 2006 when you rejected Mr. Burke’s request?’
‘We try to do the best that we can; we can’t be all things to all people; we went with the best assessment we had.’
That answer was two cliched platitudes mixed with a lie. It was past lunch, we were tired and I lost it. ‘I am sorry but that is not true. At the time you refused Graham in early December you had only one assessment. You are trying to deceive us into believing the December and February events commingle. Frankly you are lying and it makes me sick.’
How does it feel when a government employee in a supervisory capacity sits in a appeal board – albeit and Kangaroo Court – and lies repeatedly? It’s pretty frustrating.
Stay tuned tomorrow for the next chapter of Kangaroo Court on PEI.
Leave a Reply