The Human Rights Commission hearings into the complaints against the Disability Support Program started today in Charlottetown.
Jacqueline O'Keefe of HR Commission and Karen Campbell for parents
The hearings are expected to take 4 days. The case was made compellingly that the Province abandoned these children and parents.
The facts and complaints are similar among 4 sets of parents with 4 autistic children. Autism is the most common neurological disorder affecting children says the Autism Society Canada.
Two of the parent sets gave testimony today and it was emotional and convincing. In the morning there was one point where there wasn’t a dry eye. It is inconceivable that these parents have held up for ten years under their loads with diminishing support from the DSP.
The cost of treating an autistic child can run $40,000 per year or more. These parents are hardworking people who have spent all their money, mortgaged their homes and are at the end of their financial and emotional resources. The government, on the other hand, is basically downsizing their support to autistics until it will disappear.
One complaint is that the DSP discriminates against the individuals (the autistic children) by reducing or eliminating their treatment for autism based on the income of the parents. One child’s parents reported their support for their child dropped from more than $1,000 per month to $11 per month in 5 years. The child’s disability did not diminish over that period.
The parents also claim discrimination in DSP screening tool which is not designed for autism but for physical disabilities. The screening tool has rated the autistic children as moderately disabled when then require 24-hour surveillance and support from the parents. The result of the screening tool bears no relationship to the actual disability of the child.
Prior to the implementation of the DSP, both children with autism were covered under a program that provided the required assistance with an appropriate screening tool for autism and without limiting treatment based on parental income.
Why does the government use these punitive and discriminatory policies? The only explanation is contained in the Baker Consulting report. Speaking on equitable access to public support, Baker says
‘Initiatives in this area were constrained by a strong corporate culture of cost containment/cost avoidance and considerable opportunity appears to exist to enhance equality of access to publicly-funded disability support.’
The Executive Director of the DSP, Kathy Jones, was present. She was dressed like a lawyer with enough gold jewelery for a Christmas Ball. She looked out of place.
It was a hard day. The testimony compelling. Testimony will continue until Friday.
mcewen
I find this both quite shocking and entirely predictable.
Cost reduction has got to be a huge incentive for the payer.
The criteria for measuring ‘disability’ does not take account of the 24 hour supervision requirement.I am not in the least surprised, and indeed, applaud the parents for taking action.
Best wishes, Thank you for bringing this to our attention
jypsy
In the morning there was one point where there wasn’t a dry eye.
What, exactly, brought that on?