Access: Treatment for itching and shyness
43 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 Newer→ Last
-
What a hideous excuse for a human being Farrar is. He knows exactly what he’s doing when he sets up a “how disabled is this guy really?” question in his post. And then he moved on to suggesting the man (who seems to have multiple problems) is a benefit cheat.
I can't bear to read it. The oily pair don't deserve attention, and Farrar is the worst in my view because he is smart, and as you say, knows exactly what he is doing.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
And then he moved on to suggesting the man (who seems to have multiple problems) is a benefit cheat.
Another Sam Kuha perhaps?
The Kaikohe invalid beneficiary went to Winz on September 14 last year to apply for an emergency grant after running out of food and money. He was told he had to see a budgeter first, but had to wait three weeks for an appointment.
He went on hunger strike and four days later made the 4km trek into town on his electric wheelchair to draw attention to his protest with a sledgehammer. He lifted his hunger strike 30 days later when Social Development Minister Paula Bennett agreed to hear his concerns face-to-face.In the Kaikohe District Court on Friday Judge Greg Davis ....noted that Kuha's benefit had increased by 41 per cent because he was now receiving his full entitlement.
bold mine
Farrar is a despicable person. -
Not sure why David Farrar is so nasty about disability and encourages disability hate speech on his blog. He has talked publicly about his own speech impairment as a child, which was perhaps dyspraxia. No self-reflection perhaps?
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
Perhaps its his way of trying to fit in with the 'in' crowd.
Stirring up hate against minorities is a well proven method of boosting one's own popularity...especially if the masses you want to attract are also insecure....but are not quite sure of the source of their insecurities.
Both him and his cetacean offsider did an awesome job of rabble rousing against Sam Kuha....I won't link, in the interests of decency....but I missed at the time the support Sam got from Auriole Ruka from CCS Disability Action.
Rare indeed for a government funded agency to publicly advocate.
-
Perhaps its his way of trying to fit in with the ‘in’ crowd.
Perhaps.
Or perhaps it's a planned and cynical move to manipulate public opinion so that New Zealand can once again follow the YUK down a dark pathwe are already on the path, but perhaps the Nats want quicker movement. DF is a faithful servant of the Party- whatever it takes.
-
Here's the sort of behaviour that hateful articles like Farrar's legitimise.
-
Joe Wylie, in reply to
Here's the sort of behaviour that hateful articles like Farrar's legitimise.
Thank you Sacha, though until I checked the date I did rather hope that was an old news item. The pros and cons of special classes aside, IMHE their alumni tend to keep in touch with one another at least as much as the general populace might.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
down a dark path
.....the path to 'voluntary' doctor assisted suicide and euthanasia.
...because we all know that not having a fine functioning brain and a healthy able body are grounds for the blessed relief of the merciful needle. Unbearable suffering of the less than perfect.
I am tempted to make this my no.1 issue....there must be a push back against ANY serious discussion on euthanasia until the right to supports for those with disabilities is enshrined in law.
Until no person who requires support is ever made to feel like a burden on their family or wider community.
Kinda like the entitled, deserving ACC clients. You don't often hear them being called bludgers....even if they are technically responsible for their injury.
Yet non ACC disabled....totally different.
Maybe its time to do a post or two about the differences and disparities...and the resulting attitudes from the wider community as a result...?
-
Sacha, in reply to
Or we could use the (inevitable) national conversation about euthanasia to leverage the issue of proper supports onto the table.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
Or we could use the (inevitable) national conversation about euthanasia to leverage the issue of proper supports onto the table.
Exactly.
Now...???
A list?
1. totally align ACC and MOH disability supports. The work has already been done comparing these for SCI....went largely under the radar. (this is kind of my bailiwick, so I have resources). Would not be hard to do similar for other impairments.
-
But that requires a change in bedrock philosophy from no-one with a disability is entitled to any support , which is the Ministry of Health and therefore the Government's core belief, to a philosophy which entitles people to the essential support they need, as with ACC.
Until that philosophy changes, the Ministry of Health will continue to keep disability costs in check by curtailing necessary support. It doesn't help that there is no ring-fenced budget for disability or that MOH reporting rolls disability/aged care and health supports together. I don't think you can find out what is actually spent on disability support and I don't think that's accidental.
I'm not convinced the MOH is capable of changing its model or that it wants or intends any real change. I also think it is dysfunctional. While this situation exists it is unlikely that genuine people centred change will occur.
I think there needs to be a stand alone Ministry to cater properly for people with disabilities. The MOH has demonstrated over years that it cannot do the job.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
It doesn’t help that there is no ring-fenced budget for disability or that MOH reporting rolls disability/aged care and health supports together. I don’t think you can find out what is actually spent on disability support and I don’t think that’s accidental.
Somewhere, in the depths of the fetid pit that constitutes my hard drive, is a document from some years back that does just that....breaks down the spending on disability supports....from how much on the DIAS and NASCs through to EMS and HCSS.
The most recent document I can find is this wee tome...http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-nz/51SCHE_EVI_00DBSCH_EST_63035_1_A436246/62fe0cca96986bfbd86db0e1dc0486ac55a3642eAbout 173 pages worth....make a cuppa and enjoy!
-
Sacha, in reply to
There is also a brief cross-govt spending table on p12 of this: http://www.parliament.nz/resource/en-nz/48DBSCH_SCR4194_1/cb220d2e3ba25dc33dec0b28b29b30578d110dd5
I have the unpublished in-depth report behind the numbers (somewhere).
-
I agree entirely that non-accident disability should attract the same support as accident disability. At the moment though I would be worried that the result would be the other way round - accident disability would be downgraded to the same level of support currently offered for non-accident disability.
It would certainly be in keeping with all the other bitter stories I've heard about ACC lately.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
all the other bitter stories I’ve heard about ACC lately.
....and we have Dame Paula Rebstock to thank for that.
accident disability would be downgraded to the same level of support currently offered for non-accident disability.
Can ACC actually do that without significant changes to the Legislation?
I know that many folk have been denied cover...(and this is a separate issue...but one that needs much more attention) but have entitlements for those accepted for cover been significantly degraded?
I have heard of a few instances of those with SCI under ACC have been denied full entitlements but have successfully appealed....because the legislation supports them.
The Miserly of Health makes it quite clear that there are no entitlements....and the Law would appear to support that.
My immediate solution to partially fund a degree of parity for those not covered by ACC would be to radically prune the number of PLODS with their snouts in the disability funding trough.
-
An interesting release from 2000....a 'show your thinking' piece from Annette King...very interesting in retrospect.
-
Rosemary McDonald, in reply to
SCI Strategy Situation Analysis Paper 27 Feb 2013 (FINAL).pdf
It would certainly be in keeping with all the other bitter stories I’ve heard about ACC lately.
You may or may not have seen the document above…
Pages 81 onwards has an in depth analysis of the differences between ACC and MOH for supports etc for those with SCI.
I began counting the number of times “limit"and “limited” were used on the MOH side of the chart…..
This joint ACC/MOH project led to the inevitable Action Plan…http://www.health.govt.nz/publication/new-zealand-spinal-cord-impairment-action-plan-2014-2019
which makes no mention of the disparities.
There has been at least one large consumer meeting for ACC spinal impaired facilitated by TASC…but none for those not covered by ACC.
http://www.tasc.org.nz/pdf/TASC-Newsletter-Apr-May-Jun-2015-.pdf
My partner has made numerous attempts to try to get some traction with both TASC and the NZ Spinal Trust but to no avail.
He has given up. Refuses to pay subs….but still gets the TASC newsletter….almost like they are rubbing it in.
-
Hilary Stace, in reply to
Apparently OK for disability hate speech enabler to be on public radio. David Farrar on the Panel today.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.