meeting set for the 7th

Ok heard back meeting on the 7th with Me, Katelynd, Kelly and Katrina.

Wonder of they are getting RSS feeds.

meeting

I rang Katelynd and told her I think we need a meeting before the 13th. I'd like to think that that will happen and that they will have some answers to my questions. But I'm cynical and I won't bank on all parties being available before the 13th or that they will have answers to the questions I have asked.

One big thing that I forgot to ask them was: "Has anyone considered the fact that Sue may not want to move from the area she is living in?" She had been in the Newcastle region since she was 19. She likes the region and has always said she never wants to live down in the city. This proposed move will move her to the city. I reckon they have not even considered that one.

Not many people have ever asked Sue where she wants to live. Also how do you think her behaviour will respond to a forced move against her will? I know how that one will go.

When she moved to Kanangra I spent a long time explaining it to her and continuing to explaining it to her for quite a while. And I also explained how Kanangra meet her parole conditions. One of the first things she asked me was it the place in Morisset and she said it was good it was in the region she likes. And then she was pleased to find people that she knew there. It made the move for her a bit easier.

Also in her new accommodation if she assaults staff will police be called? If so then isn't that just setting her up to more contact with the criminal justice system and jail?

For now where she is that does not occur, the police are not called.

Also how are you going to cope with her self harm stuff? Are you going to be as pro active as Kanangra. No knifes, no glass, no access to things to throw at staff?

I keep on coming up with new questions. Which is good but i reckon they have not considered them.

speak of the devil

Here is the email reply from one member of the CJP DADHC

"Afternoon Julie,

I wanted to let you know that we have received your email.

Thankyou for passing on your concerns and questions regarding Sue moving into the community.
My managers have asked me to let you know that they have taken on board the seriousness of the issues you raised in your email and to reassure you that they will be responding in more detail shortly.

As you would know, we have organised a meeting for 13th October 2010 with the OPG at Quakers Hill. My managers have asked me to let you know that if you would like to meet prior to this date, we are more than happy to facilitate an earlier appointment with you at our Parramatta Office.


Kind Regards,

Katelynd"

no replies

I find it disheartening that only the guardian has e-mailed me back. The others could have sent an email back saying they were working on answers to my questions.

It does nothing to stop my concerns about their motivation.

frustrated

I do not understand why DADHC and the Criminal Justice program are still think of moving Susie. Everyone involved that work with her daily and have done for a number of years now say she is not ready.

I have looked at the outside of the place and due to the fact the Sue cannot have access to the community all she is going to do is sit in a unit with no outside contact, it's just really a differant style of jail.

STUPID STUPID PEOPLE.

So far simple questions like
What happens if you move her and it fails where will she be moved to?
Are you going to provide activites for her?
How many staff?
Level of training?

Have come back with "I can't answer that"

Gezz people get it together
i haven't even asked the really hard ones.

Like birth control? What happens if she gets out of the housing? What happens if the neighbours call the police?

HOPELESS JUTS HOPELESS.
they really haven't thought this thing through have they.

And to top it off Katelynd way to Kanangra and DIDN'T MEET SUE.

when i asked her why she said she was running late. I told her the least she should have done was to pop in and quickly introduce herself 5 minutes that all it would have taken. It's rude, inconsiderate and smacks of them treating Sue with disregard.

email sent to those involved in trying to move Sue

this is what i sent to all the names i have that are invloved in trying to move Sue from Kanangra. I will post their replies if i get any.

Hi
I am Sue's sister and I have some questions about why your agency is considering moving her.

Why are you considering moving her when her staff and the psychiatrist at Kanangra have told you she is not ready to move?
What is the pool of staff that will work with Sue and how many staff will be on duty each day at the accommodation you are thinking of moving her to?
How many staff are going to be assigned to Sue?
What are the staffs qualifications and experience?
What day programs and activities are you going to provide for Sue and where are they going to be held?
I have been told that Sue will be able to maintain contact with her friends at Kanangra how will this be achieved?
Is there a plan to move Sue into the wider community?
If this move fails what is the plan for Sue's accommodation? Can she move back to Kanangra?
What are you going to do if neighbours complain about the behaviour and noise from your residents?
Are the other clients permanent residents? Do they have an intellectual disability?
Have you read Sue's file?
Do you know what her various diagnosis are?
Have you read her court records?
What makes you think this placement will work when others have not?
Have you read her parole conditions?
Do you think you can modify Sue's behaviour better than Kanangra?
What happens to the housing and Sue when funding for the project Stronger Together stops or is rescinded?
How are you going to deal with her mental health issues? Will she have ongoing psych support as she has at Kanangra?
Who suggested Sue was valid candidate for this move? And why? Have they meet Sue or talked with Sue or her staff?
Was Sue assessed for this placement? If so how? What was the criteria?
When was the last time anyone connected with this project meet Sue?
Who is The Office of the Senior Practitioner?
Is Sue being considered to be moved because of a need to fill vacancies?
Why not just leave Sue where she is and move her with the rest of the Kanangra clients?

Or is it on the table to move Sue purely because the Ombudsmen has criticised DADHC'sDADHC's role and that in "In 2004, in response to a complaint about the lack of progress of the SOG, we initiated an investigation of DADHC's conduct as lead agency of the SOG. Our investigation found significant problems with DADHC's leadership of the SOG, little progress on individual projects initiated under the auspice of the SOG, and little evidence of agencies working collaboratively and cooperatively to achieve better service delivery for people with an intellectual disability in contact with the criminal justice system."
(NSW Ombudsmen, Supporting people with an intellectual disability in the criminal justice system: Progress report A special report to Parliament under s31 and s26 of the Ombudsman Act 1974 August 2008)

Is the Community Justice Program Program Guidelines Version 1.0 still the guidelines your agency is working off? If so then Sue does not meet your own policy guideline: "to assist people moving from a correctional facility into the community, and to meet the accommodation and support options for those who are exiting a correctional facility." Sue is currently housed, she is not in jail. Neither is she :"Without support and stable housing in the post release period", or at risk "of homelessness often resulting in returning to gaol." Neither is Sue a valid candidate for: "moving through and out of the accommodation and support services" that DADHC provide. She cannot live in the broader community.

Your report also says that: many of the clients you will help "have little access to consistent financial, vocational, educational and social opportunities or support." That is not the case with Sue. She has excellent support at Kanangra.

You are considering moving someone who is currently housed safely and stably and has not had any contact with the police since she has been housed at Kanangra. Why are you thinking of intervening when she is already settled?

I would like to raise the fact that prior to Kanangra Sue had had 7 previous housing options provided by DADHC. All of these failed. Why do you think she is in Kanangra?

I have grave concerns when DADHC staff start talking about training Sue, that she can be taught to behave via behaviour modification. Why do you think she is in Kanangra? Kanangra does behaviour modification. Sue is not just acting out, or a "bad person" like previous DADHC staff have told me and she can not be "trained" to behave and DADHC staff need to realise that and get their head out of the sand and to stop expecting Sue to achieve things that she can not. You set her up to fail and then hold her responsible for your actions and your failings.

You need to listen to the Kanangra staff, they are the experts. They deal with Sue everyday. Why does the Criminal Justice Program and DADHC think they know better than Kanangra? One could come to the conclusion that you are saying that Kanangra do not know what they are doing. And if you think that then DADHC and the Criminal Justice Program are once again failing their clients and falling into a state of do-gooding, or maybe playing a numbers game, without thought or concern for their charges and really, in the end, that just amounts to stupidity.

To end I find it disturbing that Sue is still being consider to be moved against the advice of those working with her and I am wondering now whether it is because DADHC is currently under review by the ombudsmen via the Senior Officers Group?

Thank you
Julie

More News

I spoke with the staff at Kanangra today they said they have told Katelynd that Sue is not ready to be moved. That Sue has an active life, a peer group and she has activities to do each, that she walks each day and is settled there. That it is not in her best interest to be moved. That a move would only disrupt her and trigger off her behaviour disorder. They said that Katelynd didn't seem to have answers to how Sue's activities needs would be meet, that she said she was just an underling and she didn't know or have answers to these concerns.

These are concerns I also voiced to Katelynd. Kanangra told me they also said to Katelynd that they were concerned what will happen to Sue if the move fails.

They told me that Katelynd could not answer the issue of housing Sue if they move her and it fails.

They told me to point out to Katelynd that two staff is not enough to deal with Sue that they need a pool of staff cause when she erupts it takes four staff to deal with her.

When Katelynd rang me today I told I did not understand why Sue was even being considered to be moved when the staff that deal with her everyday including her psychiatrist say it is not in Sue's best interest. I was told that it is part of the consultation process. I said that that did not answer the question. It's tokenism. That's all it really is. I told Katelynd that what is really happening is that Sue is a number, it's all a numbers game and for the house/funding to occur they have to have people and Sue was just a number. She said no she wasn't but she would not tell me why the move is still on the table when every person who is involved with Sue objects to the move.

So I have contact emails for not only Katelynd but for the higher up staff. I've got a long list of questions and they better have answers not just dismissive "I don't know."

tell me this isn't just a numbers game, tell me i'm wrong, tell me DADHC isn't going to set her up to fail again. My alarm bells are screaming and they are screaming because the concerns of family and staff in consultation phase are not being listened to.

New News

Had a call on Monday from Kaitlyn from ADAHC - Criminal Justice Program. They are starting the process of moving the people out of Kanangra and back into the community. Now those words got my defences up because Sue cannot live in the community. Which is what I said very firmly to Kaitlin : "Why would you want to move someone back into the community when it was failed over and over again. It;s like lets set her up to fail again and really fuck her over."

Like I said I got defensive and a tad offensive. Oh well.

So in told Kaitlyn I was not happy about the situation and then I asked her to tell me about the place they have in mind for Sue.

They are using Sue's current accommodation as the model for where she will move into. So she will have a stand alone completely secured unit to her self that will have two permanent staff. The property will also have other units surround in it and that Sue can visit much like where she is now. The whole complex will be secure.

All the staff will have specific training to deal with Sue's many problems. I also told Maitland about Sue's diagnoses of her disability. Now I don't know if she didn't read Sue's file or if the information isn't in Sue's file but she knows now and I will make sure it is documented in her file so everyone who come into contact with Sue has the info available to them.

Maitland could not answer all my questions and told me she doesn't know everything as she way down the bottom of the hierarchy. Her bosses are David and and Kelly I think I need to talk to them but I reckon I've got buckly's and no chance there..

She did keep rabbiting on about Sue's behaviour being able to be modified, why can no one except Kanangra and me and my gal acknowledge the fact that that cannot happen. Sue is not"bad" she had a medically diagnosed disorder that creates behaviour disorders. Get a grip people. I'm not trying to excuse her behaviour but Sue is Sue. You can get her to aim for things based on good behaviour but when she blows there is no way to stop it and you need to get your head out of the sand and stop setting her up.

I said this to Kaitlyn, I don't think she got it. I really hope the new staff get it, the staff at Kanangra are wonderful and get Sue and her disability.

I will get to look at the property and I will be a kind of consultant as they want my feedback about it.

I want the best for Sue and that is the main aim.