ETHNIC
DISABILITY ADVOCACY CENTRE
SEVENTH
ANNUAL REPORT, 2001 - 2002
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
EDAC wishes to acknowledge the financial support of the
following agencies:
·
Department of
Health and Family Services
·
Disability
Services Commission
·
Lotteries
Commission
·
CarersWA
We also wish to acknowledge the
support of all those who have served on our management committee, project steering
committees, and assisted us in other operational matters. Without their
voluntary assistance EDAC could not have achieved its objectives.
EDAC is funded by the Commonwealth
Department of Human Services and Health and Disability Services Commission to
provide individual and systemic advocacy for ethnic people with disabilities
and their families/carers. It is the only non-government community based
advocacy centre in WA that solely represents the needs and interests of ethnic
people with disabilities
EDAC’s main objectives are:
· To
advocate on behalf of people from non-English speaking backgrounds with
disabilities in order for them to achieve equal access to services and resources
in our community.
· To empower
individuals and families from NESB by increasing their participation in
decision making, particularly in areas which affect their lives.
· To
increase the awareness of issues relating to ethnicity and disability within
the ethnic, disability and mainstream sectors.
· To
represent people from NESB with disabilities and their families or carers in
public forums, government consultations etc.
Office Bearers
Thomas Monks President
Sophie Jasinski V.
President
Dr. Anne Atkinson Secretary
Nara Srinivasam Treasurer
(resigned May 2002)
Committee Members
Ana-Maria Ortega
Thankam Abraham
Paul Trigg
Nathan Nemboussi
May Rebelo
Selina Colebourne
Kit Chui
Staff (Part-time)
Jenny Au Yeong Executive
Officer
Ramdas Sankaran Administrator
(until end of Feb.2002)
Luba McMaugh Advocacy
officer
Jasbir Mann Advocacy
officer
Veronica Fitzgerald Secretary/receptionist
When I was elected for the
position of President I didn’t realise the responsibility that I had taken.
However I found the work to be most challenging and satisfying. The priority
for my term was finding EDAC appropriate accommodation. After exploring various
options we were offered the old Neurological House in Subiaco. We have the
Lotteries Commission to thank for this fortunate turn of events.
Although EDAC operates in a
microcosm within the overall disability sector, we have clear objectives and a
strong agenda to overcome social injustice for ethnic people with disabilities
and their families. No matter how
inclusive government policies try to be there will always be a certain groups
within our community that are disengaged and disempowered from the mainstream.
EDAC advocates to ensure the issues of ethnic people
with disability are at the forefront of government decisions and policy
development. As a consumer-based organisation EDAC continually involves and
empowers consumers to take a leadership role in matters that affect them.
The reform of the welfare system
will mean further problems and hardships for people with disabilities. An
ethnic person with a disability who wants to gain employment has additional
barriers to overcome because of environmental issues and costs associated with
disability and their migrant status. I would like to see governments of all
levels taking positive measures to modify the taxation system. Incentives should be offered to people with
disabilities to enter the workforce, such as a tax rebate and concession in
stamp duty. EDAC will be actively advocating on these issues in the coming
year.
During this financial
year EDAC was extremely busy with advocacy activities and project grant
submissions. It has given me great pride to work with such selfless and
dedicated staff. Special thanks to the Executive Officer, Jenny Au Yeong for
her management and achievements on behalf of EDAC. Thanks and best wishes to Ramdas Sankaran who
resigned in February 2002 to take a position at the Multicultural Services WA.
I would also like to
acknowledge the management committee for their support and hard work,
particularly Dr. Anne Atkinson who chaired many project committees. Dr. Nara
Srinivasam, our Treasurer, resigned in May 2002 because of work commitments but
we were delighted that his wife Hema was co-opted to the management committee
and continued his good work. I wish Nara
all the best in his new position at Murdoch University.
Finally, we are greatly
appreciative of our funding bodies and all the organisations that have assisted
us throughout the year.
There are many projects and new
initiatives underway and I have a very good feeling about the future of EDAC.
Together we can make a difference.
Tom Monks
President
It has been another very busy and productive year for us at
EDAC. This year’s activities and achievements reflected the dedication and hard
work of staff, volunteers and board members. Despite receiving the same level
of funding from both Commonwealth and State governments we managed to
accomplish considerable success in fulfilling all our objectives and initiated
a number of priority projects in partnership with several community based
agencies.
In our individual advocacy and
information program we attended to 430 cases which was an effective increase of
102 from last year’s figure. The total number of contacts and frequency of
service for advocacy cases was over 800. Clients who attended the support group
meetings, project activities and consultations were not reflected in the
statistics of individual advocacy but were reported under systemic events and
activities.
The greatest demand in the
individual advocacy program was in the area of access, rights and discrimination.
Consumers were experiencing problems in accessing services because of changes
in eligibility criteria and the complexities of organisational structures.
Centrelink’s welfare reform and the shortages of accommodation support and
other services created hardship and frustration for many ethnic consumers with
disabilities and their families. As the majority of our clients had English as
a second language, the use of professional interpreters was necessary in
dealing with their situation and therefore greater time and patience was
required on the part of the advocate. With 1FTE in the individual advocacy
role, the demand and stress was great due to the lack of resources and support.
Just as well most of our staff are multi skilled,
multi-lingual and willing to be flexible in their duties.
The systemic advocacy program also
reflected another year of heightened activities and achievements. Having
chaired the Domestic Violence and Women with Disabilities Interagency Committee
for nearly two years, I was pleased that the Lotteries Commission allocated
funding to conduct social research in this neglected area. The project
partnership is between EDAC, People with Disabilities and
As you would recall, the Minister
for Disability Services announced new initiatives for Carers at our last AGM.
Again I am happy to say we were successful in obtaining a grant to research the
needs of CALD Carers in the metropolitan and rural regions. This project is due
to be completed by the end of this year.
EDAC has been working
collaboratively with a number of disability and ethnic organisations to enhance
the rights of ethnic people with disabilities as well as raising awareness of
their issues. A number of consultations
were undertaken during the year, including the NESB
mental health consumer consultation and a youth and disability consultation.
The outcome of these consultations have been compiled
into two reports to be launched at the AGM. A partnership with ISHAR and the
Australian Transcultural Mental Health Unit resulted in another successful
application to the Mental Health Division for support for Carers in Mental
Health services.
The Review of the
Disability Services Act was a significant event for the disability services
sector and EDAC was represented on the Complaints and Grievances Working Party
in relation to Part 6 of the Act.
We were also monitored by
the Disability Services Standards Monitoring Unit and were highly commended for
our management and service quality.
The highlight of the year
was moving into new office accommodation at Lotteries House in Subiaco. It
means that we are able to escape the burden of escalating rental costs. With
our funding remaining the same as it was six years ago it became impossible to
meet the rising operational costs and maintain the level of advocacy services.
If there are savings to be made it should be used to redress the poor salary
conditions of staff.
As you can see EDAC
enjoyed a good working relationship with many ethnic and disability agencies
and has strengthened partnerships through many ongoing projects. Of course this
would not be possible without the efforts and hardwork of many people on the
management committee, staff and volunteers. I would like to thank them
wholeheartedly for keeping me active and continually challenged. To all our volunteers especially Elaine Whitfield, Kit Chui and
Kevin Cheong many thanks for your valuable contribution to EDAC. All
members of management have made excellent contributions in various aspects of
EDAC’s operations but I would like to especially thank Anne Atkinson, Tom
Monks, Sophie Jasinski and Milan Uskokovic who offered assistance when needed. Many thanks and best wishes to Ramdas Sankaran whom I have worked
with at EDAC for over four years. Finally to all the staff members you
have done a fantastic job.
JENNY AU
YEONG
EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OBJECTIVE: To provide an effective and culturally
responsive individual advocacy service to safeguard the rights and address the
grievances of people with disabilities from NESB.
In the 2001/2002 financial year,
EDAC recorded a total of 430 cases (an increase of 102 cases from last year) of
which 98 were advocacy cases and 332 were related to information provision and
short-term cases. Of the 98 advocacy cases there were 135 issues
presented. The total number of contacts
for individual advocacy was over 1000. Individuals attending family support
group meetings and various consultation meetings were not included in this data
but reported under the systemic advocacy role.
Most of our clients had limited
English comprehension and inadequate knowledge of service structures to advocate
for themselves. Clients from Vietnamese backgrounds were the highest group at
12%. The requirements for interpreting requests have also risen significantly.
Referrals came from the ethnic and disability sectors but the number of
self-referrals has increased, probably due to consumers becoming more familiar
with our services. Clients were often referred to us as a last resort, as EDAC
is the only agency that solely advocates for people with disabilities from
NESB. The following statistics provide a profile of clients and the types of
advocacy issues addressed by EDAC advocacy staff.
FIGURE 1: GENDER
Male clients still account for the majority of our cases
with the percentage remaining the same as last year.
FIGURE 2: AGE
At 24% the majority of consumers were from a younger age
group (30-39) than last year. 20% of consumers were aged 40-49, followed by 13%
who were 65 years and over which was 2% lower than the previous year.
FIGURE 3: DISABILITY
People with physical
disabilities constituted 51% of the total advocacy cases, a reduction of 2%
from the previous year. The percentage
of people with psychiatric disabilities has decreased from 9% to 7%. The number of people with intellectual disabilities increased by 5%
to 28%. People with acquired brain injury represented 2% of consumers.
This year a ‘health’ factor was introduced for those who had chronic medical
illness or terminal conditions.
FIGURE 5: ETHNICITY
There were over 30 ethnic
groups represented here. The highest number of clients came from the Vietnamese
community followed by people from Indian, African, South American, Middle Eastern,
Chinese and other Asian backgrounds. The ‘South American’ category consisted
mainly of El Salvadoreans and Chileans, those from the Middle East were mainly
Iraqis and Iranians, whilst the ‘other Asians’ consisted of Indonesians,
Malays, Thais, and Cambodians. The Polish, Macedonian, Bosnian and Lebanese
communities were also quite significant. Those from the African community
comprised mainly of Somalis, Ethiopians and Sudanese.
FIGURE 6: INDIVIDUAL ADVOCACY ISSUES
Of the 98 advocacy cases there
were a total number of 135 advocacy issues addressed.
Access/rights/discrimination matters featured highly this year (20%). There was
an increase in the number of complaints/grievances relating to unfair treatment
at work, and lack of eligibility for services. Accommodation and
employment/education ranked equal at 13%. Accommodation cases also included
matters relating to support for independent living. Access to appropriate
employment and education remained a significant problem for people with
disabilities who have limited English comprehension.
Case Study No. 1
Client: Angelica
Angelica, aged 33, was married
with a 4-year-old daughter Rose. Both husband and wife were from Asian backgrounds
and were happy in their arranged marriage. After migrating to Australia her
husband Peter was in and out of employment. Angelica claimed that the shouting
and abuse started about then. He blamed his bad luck on Angelica because she
insisted on migrating to Australia. After a while Angelica decided she had
enough and returned home to her parents’ house in Asia for a holiday. Whilst there she was
diagnosed as having at least 3 tumors in her brain. She returned to
Australia for surgery followed by chemotherapy. Angelica was often in pain and
exhausted by the treatment. No housework was done because she would sleep all
day. Peter was not supportive and felt quite neglected. The abuse and shouting
became more intense. One cold June morning Peter left with his daughter Rose
while Angelica was in bed. When Angelica discovered that Peter had absconded
with their daughter she was extremely distraught. Her mother contacted EDAC for
assistance.
Angelica was understandably traumatized
and could barely walk when the advocacy officer visited the home to offer
assistance. She expressed grave concern over the welfare of her daughter if not
found soon. Both women were distraught and in shock and there was an obvious
urgency in finding father and daughter. The police were contacted to prevent
Peter from taking Rose out of the country. The advocacy officer provided
emotional support and also arranged counseling for Angelica. Word was also sent
to her estranged husband through community elders that the police were looking
for him.
Within two days, Peter surrendered
the child to the police and EDAC organised a lawyer for Angelica through Legal
Aid to safeguard her rights. Angelica was assisted with applying for child
custody and spousal maintenance. Throughout her ordeal the advocacy officer
visited her home regularly and provided necessary support.
Today Angelica has won custody of
her child as well as an 80% share in the settlement of properties. Angelica is
studying to be a teacher and although she still undergoes treatment she sees a
much safer and brighter future. She maintains some contact with EDAC.
Case study No. 2
Client: Cindy
Cindy worked for a welfare agency
for three months before she was dismissed on the grounds of ‘poor performance’.
She had a history of depressive illness but at the time of her employment she
was in a positive mental state. After being sacked she became quite depressed
and felt she had lost confidence in herself, as she believed she had done nothing
wrong. She felt she would lose future job prospects because of this incident.
It was Cindy’s father who referred her to EDAC.
Cindy felt the dismissal was
unfair and the reasons provided to her were unfounded. EDAC’s advocacy officer
assisted her in applying for legal aid but was rejected. It was agreed between
the client and her advocacy officer that she would lodge a complaint with the
West Australian Industrial Relations Commission (WAIRC) on the grounds of
‘unfair dismissal’ and some assistance would be provided in compiling her case.
Both the client and the advocacy
officer started compiling information to prepare their case which was to be
heard before a Commissioner at the Industrial Relations Court room.
The picture that was starting to
emerge was that Cindy may have in fact been a victim of racism. Being of
Vietnamese origin, Cindy recalled moments when the staff she worked with would
make ‘light hearted’ jokes about the ‘boat people’. Cindy did not warm to their
banter and she complained to her manager that she found the jokes offensive.
She was told to bear the jokes or leave, but there were no witnesses.
Furthermore, Cindy was described
as ‘not performing’ well at her job but the agency had failed to provide her
with a clear duty statement and any indications that she was not performing.
Because of these circumstances the hearing went in Cindy’s favor. She was
awarded damages and reinstatement of her position, which she declined.
Cindy is now working as a manager at her father’s restaurant.
She continues to take medication for her depression and her confidence is
improving.
EDAC’s systemic advocacy focuses
on influencing changes in society in order to positively affect the quality of
life of ethnic people with disabilities. It may involve challenging policies
and practices as well as providing groups with information and education. As a
consumer based organisation we aim to empower consumers by increasing their participation
in decision making processes and including them in public forums and government
consultations. The following are targeted systemic advocacy activities and
achievements undertaken during the year.
Objective 1 – Consumer Participation and empowerment
Ø Involving consumers on committees and advisory groups
A number of consumers were nominated on
committees to enable them to participate in decision making processes. EDAC’s
consumers are now represented on Centrelink’s Consumer Advisory Council, ECC
Management and NEDA.
Ø
NESB Mental
Health Consumer Consultation
EDAC undertook a NESB mental health consumer
consultation in partnership with the National Ethnic Disability Alliance (NEDA)
and the Australian Transcultural Mental Health Network (ATMHN).
Key
issues raised included:
·
Lack of awareness by NESB people of
mental health services available;
·
Fear of being ostracized, isolated or cut
off from the community;
·
Misdiagnosis or incorrect treatment by a
health professional;
·
Lack of translated information and
referral options; and
·
Long waiting lists and distances to
access appropriate services.
Suggested
solutions were:
·
Mandatory cross-cultural training of
staff;
·
Increased community education on mental
health issues through media campaigns;
·
Greater consumer involvement in managing
mental health projects;
·
Stronger partnerships between mental
health agencies, service providers and NESB communities; and
·
Coordinated consumer advocacy on a local,
state and national level.
EDAC has compiled a report to the National Ethnic Disability
Alliance to assist with development of policy and to ensure the views of
consumers are incorporated into the national mental health agenda.
EDAC is in the process of developing an action group
involving mental health consumers, as suggested by participants at the
consultation.
Ø
Carers respite
Funding was sought from the CarersWA to organise a weekend respite/retreat for members of the Multicultural Carers Sup