tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post8993110732866447567..comments2024-03-26T10:03:51.827+13:00Comments on Karl du Fresne: Politicising the disabledKarl du Fresnehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05054853925940134404noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post-51095357512978543512010-07-22T12:57:46.088+12:002010-07-22T12:57:46.088+12:00I think it would be good to look at the issue with...I think it would be good to look at the issue with both a wide angle lens and a focus on people's individual perspective. <br /><br />The problem I have with people focussing in on an 'ideology' is that this presupposes that ideology does not exist for people with a highly paternalistic view of what people with intellectual disability need. <br /><br />I think in reporting this issue more research is needed to show the different sides of the debate, maybe even talk to people with intellectual disability who are self advocates?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03263167705878154493noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post-40389141416402047652010-07-16T16:39:06.551+12:002010-07-16T16:39:06.551+12:00Thanks for that thoughtful contribution. If I revi...Thanks for that thoughtful contribution. If I revisit the subject, as I intend to do, I'd be happy to seek your input.Karl du Fresnehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05054853925940134404noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post-46114986860860328932010-07-16T11:55:12.802+12:002010-07-16T11:55:12.802+12:00So, what's this blog about – the inappropriat...So, what's this blog about – the inappropriateness of an ideological and statutory change, or the incompetence of one of NZ's largest service providers to competently and progressively respond to that change? I think you are confusing the two and I'm not sure whether you are intentionally doing that in order to try and argue the point or not.<br /><br />Your argument as it stands could be like saying we shouldn't allow women to vote because some choose not to; or we shouldn't allow same-sex marriages because some will end in divorce. Based on the democratic capitalistic system we are all beholden to, the repeal of the DPEP Act was consistent with the notion of a fair and just society. <br /><br />There are many non-disabled people who do not value money as others but we don't restrict their access to bartering power (money) because of that.<br /><br />IHC is, on the whole, an inefficient, ineffective monolith staffed by good people who work there for the right reasons. But it constantly makes poor decisions because it has reached the size where it cannot make good ones.<br /><br />You say yourself:<br /><br />"It wasn’t a question of IHC’s sheltered workshops no longer being economically viable, because other providers of similar services, having obtained the necessary exemptions from the minimum wage, continue to operate.<br /><br />"The insensitivity with which aspects of the change were handled by IHC is extraordinary."<br /><br />To marry that with the accusation of "a rising clamour for disabled people’s rights ... cheered on by disabled activists" borders on bigotry and is disrespectful of many generations of "well-educated, articulate people with physical and sensory rather than intellectual disabilities" (and non-disabled people) who have fought long and hard to increase fairness and justice to all disabled people, regardless of impairment.<br /><br />I totally agree that sitting idle on a benefit, or spending "time in empty, purposeless non-activities euphemistically labelled 'community participation'” is demeaning and wasteful. But the issued is with the current labour market – it is too inflexible to ensure opportunity for everyone. Those with capacity or culture that doesn't match the mainstream labour pool require resources to survive, but there is no reason why they couldn't negotiate a civic contribution in return for state assistance that matches their capability. These would be "designed jobs", created to suit a unique set of attributes and skill-set. It's not like everything in society gets done, so there's plenty of scope to design some unique civic contributions.<br /><br />The opportunity lost with law reform and ideological progress, such as deinstitutionalisation and the DPEP Act repeal, is a progressive response that add value to people's lives. This is seldom if ever achieved for disabled people (especially those with intellectual impairment) for lack of two things <br /><br />1. The ability of concerned adults to allow people to take supported and managed risks, for fear of the consequences.<br /><br />2. Investment in creative, innovative solutions that accommodate diversity.<br /><br />In the absence of these things, the situation only gets worse. Going back won't make them better.diversitynzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14275115826690082686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post-66752843582792191862010-07-13T08:48:05.125+12:002010-07-13T08:48:05.125+12:00Karl
An excellent commentary on the vocational se...Karl<br /><br />An excellent commentary on the vocational services experiences of many families in New Zealand.<br />Just who is accountable to who is the $ 64000 question. Lindsay Mitchell is right that the government becomes the customer and not the disabled person as seems the case to many many parents.<br /><br />Until there is accountability, transparency and consultation with the stakeholders these situations will continue to occur.Radarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15286852901520920505noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8442430064359197279.post-65861383562558820152010-07-13T08:28:37.416+12:002010-07-13T08:28:37.416+12:00Karl, You identify an important development in gov...Karl, You identify an important development in government capture of charities and churches. IHC now tell parents that they are accountable to government first because that's where their funding comes from (as David and Ronda Heather discovered). And having been a collector for the organisation for a number of years it shouldn't have been a surprise to me when they ceased their annual door-to-door appeal around 2006-7.<br /><br />The 'capture' works for the charity/church while a leftist regime is in place but when an administration that wants to cut back the role of the state presides, where to?<br /><br />This is what we are seeing with the formation of the 'shadow' welfare working group made up of politically left advocates, academics and mainstream churches. They will bring as much pressure to bear as they can on retaining the status quo (at least). Maybe enough to overturn the plans of a government elected by a majority.Lindsay Mitchellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04437693272797130833noreply@blogger.com