Behaviour Intervention Services Part 2

Spoke with Sues worker Maria and told her all about my dealing with DADHC and their stupid comments. She said DADHC had not told her they wanted to “wash their hands of Sue." and She told me that they can't do that to her as Sue is a disability client they are obligated to offer her services.

She said there role with Sue was to assist service providers access appropriate organisations. That they have no funding to provide Sue with services they can only recommend services.

She said she was horrified at the attitudes of Sues workers and what they had said to me about "goal being safe."

She said she agreed with me that DADHC appears to be acting like they have no motive to find Sue housing, that they are not proactive in helping Sue or offering her appropriate assistance.

I'm not sure what this orginisation can do for Sue but at least the Behaviour Intervention Services knows what the attitude of Sue's DADHC workers now.

Behaviour Intervention Service

I rang this organisation on Friday at 10:00am as Sues guardian told me about them being involved with her case. He wasn't sure what there role was. I was told by the Behaviour Intervention Centre that Maria would call back that afternoon.

Still waiting.

If they haven't called by tomorrow I will call them again.

Guardians

Daniel said that he is going to apply to the guardianship tribunal for either an abolishment of his position or for his authority to be increase so he can push for Sues rights more. I told him the later is the only one I would agree with. I do understand that he is feeling used by DADHC as they see his role as one to lessen their responsibilities but Daniel can't or shouldn't look at it this way.

His role is for Sue and making sure that everybody else is honest and doing their job and doing what's best for Sue.

Daniel also said that the regional Director for DADHC has told the Newcastle branch that they cannot abdicate their responsibilities to their clients. That they are responsible for providing support to them.

So we will see what happen in relation to this with Sue and Newcastle DADHC.

I find the whole guardianship issue interesting. Sues last guardian, from what I've been told, did not attend one meeting about Sue, which to me shows a tremendous lack of regard for her client. How can you be acting on someone's behalf if you do nothing to find out about what is happening to them.

As for Daniel he is ringing the goal and getting information but as far as Daniel has told me he is relying on DADHC to contact him. Daniel didn't know when Sues next court date was because DADHC hadn't contacted him. I do not understand why all the organisations involved with Sue cannot communicate with each other efficiently. There seems to be a lack of general discussion between everyone which I can only see as detrimental to Sue.

Stats for percentage of people in prison who have an ID

"People with intellectual disabilities represent about 12-13% of the NSW prison population. As many as 23% of people appearing before NSW Local Courts on criminal charges may have a mild intellectual disability or borderline intellectual disability.^"

"People with an intellectual disability are more likely to be arrested, questioned and detained for minor public order offences. People with an intellectual disability are more likely to admit to offences, including ones they did not commit, perhaps from a desire to please the police officer or because they do not want to acknowledge that they did not understand the police officer’s questions. They are refused bail more often and are more likely to be given a custodial sentence because of a lack of adequate support in the community. People with an intellectual disability serve longer sentences or a greater part of their sentence before being granted parole.^"

The Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care (DADHC) has determined that people with “forensic issues” are in the top level of priority for access to DADHC services. DADHC has also appointed 2 workers as forensic casework specialists as part of its specialist Behaviour Intervention Service." DAHC have told me that Sue is now the criminal justices problem and they intend to not offer her services, it sounds like they are going against their own legislation in Sues case.

Please go to this link which is where the above quote comes from (http://www.ncoss.org.au/beyond_bars/) and find the number 10 link to open the rest of the article.

Links to articles.

"Compared with other populations, adults, adolescents, and children with [ID] experience poorer health and more difficulty in finding, getting to, and paying for appropriate health care." (from: http://www.igh.ualberta.ca/RHD/Synthesis/Disabilities.htm)

"The nature and prevalence of mental health problems in people with intellectual disability (ID) are poorly understood. The burden, stress and cost these place on the individual and the family and other carers are generally not acknowledged. Little is known about factors that contribute to these mental health problems and what interventions might prevent or relieve this suffering although it is erroneously assumed that what works for the general population will also help those with ID." (from: http://auseinet.flinders.edu.au/resources/auseinet/netter4/netter02.php)

Article about closing institutions in Victoria. The same thing is happening in NSW. For someone in crisis where are they meant to go. The land is sold off, revenue raising at what cost. http://www.eoc.vic.gov.au/materials/general/Janefield/2_3.html

"There appears to be no single point of entry for a person to a person for services providied by NSW Heatlh should that person have complex needs" (from: http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/committee.nsf/0/f742b6b2e561abdeca256c73002b7f87/$FILE/Chapter11-14.pdf)

"The assesment and treatment of behavioural problems." (from: http://www.racgp.org.au/afp/downloads/pdf/august2004/20040803davis.pdf)

"People with an Intellectual Disability and the Criminal Justice System: Courts and Sentencing Issues" (from: http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lrc.nsf/pages/DP35CHP2)

Case workers

July 2004

One of the more frustrating aspects of Sues case has been with Sue's case worker, Jenny. Jenny has told me that they do not intend offering Sue services in the future and that they intend to "wash their hands of Sue".

Jenny has said on three occasions now that she believes that having a facility built for women like Sue is a waste of money. That it is wrong for the government to put that much money into people. That to provide services like that would cost up to $800,000 a year and that it is wrong to spend that much money on individuals. When asked what the alternatives are she says "there really are none. Sue can't live in the community". When asked about finding an institution for people like Sue Jenny says "Oh no, we don't promote putting people in institutions, we're de-institutionalising people". And putting them where? On the streets obviously, she can't manage in the community and the government won't offer services, so when she is released from gaol she won't have anywhere to go and no way of getting accommodation and will end up living on the streets.

Now I do grant that it is a lot of money but to say that some one should not get services because of cost is shameful.

Personally I think the building should just be bought. Jenny has already told me that Sue already has unlimited funding approval for services and I'm sure that other people who could make use of this service would be eligible for similar funding. Jenny herself doesn't want to be involved with Sue anymore and she would be the one who would have to administer the funds and provide services.

I do not understand why people in Sue's situation are so readily seen as disposable, a scourge on society and not worthy of as much help as possible. I wonder if Jenny would be so callous in her statements if she understood how those comments sound to outsiders, let alone the family. She has basically said that Sue and people like her should not be given support to be the best they can be. Why is she working in this area?

Jenny is the person in the position of providing services for Sue. I have no faith in her to do so. I also believe that since Sue is in goal that to some extent they have no motive to assist Sue in finding services and accommodation, as Jenny said in our conversation last Thursday "she's really the problem of the criminal justice system now." Jenny has also said that "at least she's not homeless if she's in gaol and in gaol she's safe". Safe in gaol is an oxymoron. Gaol is a better alternative to homelessness? Homelessness is inevitable for a someone with ID?

Sue has also been given a guardian and it seems the main motive there is to pass the buck. The guardian, Daniel has realised this and wants to pass the buck back and wants to push for his guardianship to be removed.

I think the whole system have their heads up their arse and are just plain lazy. Or just cold and unfeeling as no one with any emotions in their veins could think that goal was better that establishing a facility to support people.

Introduction

Susie is a 34 year old woman who is currently incarcerated at Mulawa gaol on charges of assault. Her parole is being revoked as there is nowhere in NSW that can accommodate women with intellectual disability and behavioural problems. I have heard that there is a facility for men with similar conditions.

It is part of her parole conditions that she not be released until suitable accommodation is found.

Sue has been institutionalised since she was 10. She lived independently for a while as an adult, but since the trauma of having a child, and her being removed from her care, and subsequently having shock treatment she is no longer able to live by herself.

The situation for women in her situation is not understood by most people and brushed under the carpet by most officials or put in the too hard basket and never addressed. Sue is not the only woman we know of in this situation and we are continually hearing from workers in the field that the cost of providing an appropriate facility is not justified.

We will continue to add stories from Sues past, details of how the system is continuing to neglect her and others, and we invite people who have an interest in this field to contribute information to start bringing this issue into the light.

All people need to be taken care of in this society, even the problem people.