Meeting

Meeting was great. Ethel has now taken on Sue's case, it was Ethel that told the CJP they could not move Sue to Montrose. I am so pleased that she listened to our concerns and acted on them. Ethel you rock.

She explained why Sue is on the CJP books and why she will stay on them and it is to do wiht funding. How hard was that fot the CJP to explain to us, let see not very but they chose not to.

So the hunt is on for accommodation for Sue and she may move as far away as Orange, but if the placement is right i do not care if i have to travel further to see her.

Ethel has said that Sue will never be placed in a surbian model that she will be placed in either the Riverside, Westmead or one of the other two models that are more like where she currently lives.

We also discussed Sue's rapid aging and she said she had noticed that and will ask to get Sue assessed as to whether the aged care placement at the Central coast may be on the cards for Sue at some stage.

So all in all a good meeting

SUE ISN"T MOVING

YIPEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
WOOOOOOOOO HOOOOOOOO

doing little happy dance

shit i must be happy i don't dance

ADHC compliant

ok, the head of ADHC is organising a meeting time with me. Hopefully we'll get some answers. She is really good and was instrumental is getting Sue placed at Kanangra.

ADHC complaint response form ADHC

ADHC fowarded on my complain to Kanangra. Bad move, very bad move, Kanangra are wonderful and I will not let them get caught up in the complaint about the CJP.

So this is my reply back to ADHC

"First of all this is highly inappropriate because my complaint is not with Kanangra it is with the CJP and two workers at the CJP. Secondly it is a great delaying tactic to refer it onto someone not involved in the complaint.

So I have told Kanangra to reply back to ADHC saying that I have refused to meet with Kanangra and the CJP to discus how to communicate better with me as that avenue has already been explored before that that is why the complaint was submitted.

Secondly I said they should let ADHC know that I think it is highly inappropriate to contact Kanangra because my complaint is not with Kanangra it is with the CJP and two workers at the CJP. I have no issue or complaint with Kanangra or their staff or their communication with me. Kanangra staff are wonderful and Kanangra has been the best placement Sue has ever had."


It almost feels like the CJP are trying to cause a rift between Kanangra staff and myself by referring the complaint to them.

So I am going to add this to my complaint with the ombudsmen that the CJP inappropriatly referred this complaint to Kanangra.


Not only are CJP no good at keeping family informed they clearly can't read either for the complaint to end up at Kanangra.

Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office

Our ref: 2011-115685
Dear Ms Patterson
Thank you for your email of 25 August 2011 in which you complain about the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care (ADHC).

We cannot help you with this matter. The Commonwealth Ombudsman’s office investigates complaints about the actions of Australian Government agencies (that is, ‘Federal’ or ‘Commonwealth’ Government agencies). As ADHC is a state government agency, we cannot investigate your complaint.

The NSW Ombudsman can investigate some complaints about ADHC. You might want to contact them to see if they can help.

Yours sincerely

ADHC compliant

Dear Ms Patterson,

The Hon Andrew Constance, Minister for Ageing and Minister for Disability Services, has asked me to acknowledge receipt of your email.

A response will be sent in due course.

Office of the Hon Andrew Constance MP

Minister for Ageing

Minister for Disability Services

ADHC compliant

Ok so seeing ADHC complaints department have not repleid to me I have taken the next step. Below is an email i sent to the Ombudsmen, The Hon. Andrew James CONSTANCE, MP
Minister for Ageing, and Minister for Disability Services and The Hon. Barbara Mazzel PERRY, BA, LLB MP Shadow Minister for Disability Services. Why not just answer my emails, why ignore someone it makes no sense to be this rude and incompetent or does it just come down to plain old arrogance.

"Hello,

I have lodged a complaint with ADHC (Ageing, Disability and Home Care) about the CJP (Community Justice Program) Parramatta office on the 11.8.2011. I have not heard back from them.

The initial complaint about CJP was about why the workers assigned to my sister case (Sue Patterson) do not reply to my emails, why I seem to be excluded from very important updates to her situation (such as workers refusing to work with her) and why I have not been receiving my weekly updates. The CJP talk about making sure family are kept informed of what is going on but in reality it is merely lip service.

Now I want to know why ADHC has ignored that complaint.

Now that this has got to the point of me sending a complaint to the Ombudsmen I would like an investigation as to why the CJP are moving Sue at all. They tell me it is because she is on their books but in reality should she still be? She has served her sentence, she has housing, she is settled. They tell me it is because she is one of their clients but in their own mandate they state that: “This program is funded by the NSW Government for the provision of accommodation and support services for people with intellectual disability exiting the criminal justice system. Clients exiting correctional centres undergo a comprehensive assessment to determine the level of support required by the person. Etc.”

My sister is not exiting prison, she has been out of prison since 2004 I think, so how long will she be treated like an offender? As you can see CJP is meant to deal with people exiting prison, she is not. The CJP should be helping people who need a placement, especially if their parole depends on suitable housing. Sue served a much longer sentence than originally handed down to her simply because there was no housing for her and DADHC were refusing services at that stage. It was my partner and myself who fought for Sues accommodation.

Sue has housing now, furthermore it meets all of her very complex needs. The housing that the CJP are offering does not, clearly, as they are having problems finding staff able to cope with Sue's very high and complex needs. Sue has had seven previous DAHDC housing models that have failed.

Kanangra where she currently is has everything that Sue needs and is not scheduled to close until 2018 and will never close while Morisset hospital is open so why the rush to move her?

Thanking You

Julie Patterson"

Discrimination

A friend just pointed out something to me.

Sue has served her time, she is no longer on parole, so why are the CJP treating her like a criminal. If she did not have a disability then she would not be in this situation.

She in not a criminal, she has served her time, the CJP is for "This program is funded by the NSW Government for the provision of accommodation and support services for people with intellectual disability exiting the criminal justice system.

Clients exiting correctional centres undergo a comprehensive assessment to determine the level of support required by the person. Support may range from specific consultations or interventions to intensive accommodation support. Specialist assessment and support is provided by clinical and case work staff. A range of accommodation options is available, from intensive group home support to drop-in models.

The program aims to reduce the incidence and impact of offending behaviour by people with an intellectual disability."

She is not exiting jail she has been out for 7 years. So leave her alone and help the people who are leaving jail.