Labor Blog

A better start in life for children with disability

Bill Shorten posted Friday, 30 July 2010

Since I became Parliamentary Secretary for Disabilities and Children’s Services, I’ve learnt a lot about the many ways people with disability and their families face entrenched disadvantage in modern Australia.

Last Saturday I addressed Down Syndrome Victoria and spoke about the wonderful job parents of children with disability do.

I’ve met countless parents struggling with a feeling of isolation, as if they were the only family dealing with a child with disability. As I said then, the work of a parent with disability is never easy, often lonely, and the labour the parent performs is often unappreciated.

That’s why, as a way to help the work of parents and their children, the Gillard Labor Government will provide new access to early intervention services to help give more children with disability a better start in life.

A Better Start for Children with Disability will ensure children with disabilities affecting their development have access to intensive early intervention therapies and treatments from expert health professionals.

In the first year, around 7,880 young children and 20,000 older children diagnosed with sight and hearing impairments, cerebral palsy, Down syndrome or Fragile X syndrome will be eligible for services under the program.

Children up to the age of six with a diagnosis of one of these disabilities will be eligible to receive up to $12,000 for early intervention services.

From 1 July 2011, children will be able to access critical early intervention services like speech pathology, audiology, occupational therapy, and psychology.

A maximum of $6,000 can be spent in any financial year and families will have up to their child’s seventh birthday to use the funding.

For older children, around 20,000 children diagnosed before their 13th birthday will be able to access new Medicare services for diagnosis and treatment under this program.

Treatment items will be able to be used by children up to the age of 15.

Federal Labor knows that early intervention works, delivering real benefits to children which lasts for the rest of their lives. It also eases the isolation faced by parents bringing up a child with a severe disability.

Many families of children with a severe disability cannot afford to access early intervention for their children or bear the huge burden from paying for therapies and treatments from their own pocket.

The Gillard Labor Government wants to relieve this financial pressure and make vital early intervention services more affordable and accessible for families.

This total package will cost $122 million over four years.

This announcement is a step to move Australia forward by providing a better start for children with disability.
Tags: children, disabilities, disability, Shorten, support, treatment

+ View all

8 Comments

jooles from kingston , tas Sunday, 15 May 2011, 19:15

Why is arthritis excluded? The peak body for this disease reports 1 in 5 australians have this, compared to children with disabilities which Bill Shorten says is 1 in 12. My state government reports a ratio above the national average of over 1 in 3.
ally806 from Coorparoo , QLD Thursday, 9 September 2010, 18:09

The issue of funding for the disability sector is a large and complex one but as I read more about the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS) I am inclined to believe that maybe it does not need to be. In the beginning of this message Mr Shorten talks of his growing familiarity with the struggles faced by families of and individuals living with a disability. As a person with a disability myself and a support worker in the disability sector I am all too familiar with the financial, physical and emotional pressures that occur in this sector. The financial pressures are significantly impacted upon by the current ‘crisis funding’ approach to the disability sector. At present an individuals must apply for funding that often only partially covers the total costs involved, leaving the individual or their family to foot the bill or go without. This is a scenario I have seen at my workplace a number of times now. Clients having no kilometres to travel on Community Access Programs and being restricted to walking or public transport, or only getting 4 hours support a month because their funding does not match the cost of accessing such services on a more regular basis. Furthermore it is an issue that has further reaching impacts on the community. This informal and unpaid support role taken on by family members also put financial on the community through increased people on welfare payments and social pressure as this ageing carer group becomes less and less able to support the needs of their loved ones. There are a lot of issues that Mr Shorten should be very familiar with and yet I am confused as to how he thinks throwing a little extra money at different areas and disabilities with be all that much different from what is occurring now. I would like to see clarification around whether the statement “...ensure children with disabilities affecting their development have access to intensive early intervention therapies and treatments from expert health professionals” means full funding to access these ‘expert health professionals’ as many times as is necessary for the support of that individual or whether it would be restricted partial funding and therefore be no different to the current situation. Money is absolutely essential to providing early intervention services to people with disabilities but having a stable, efficient and effective system for the sector is equally as vital. Furthermore Ms Bennett-Roberts points out in her response this funding promise leaves out a number of disabilities and therefore denies this extra funding to all those that experience disabilities outside of the ones mentioned. There are enough cracks in the current system to fall through without adding to them by restricting the funding applications in such a fashion People with disabilities and their families need holistic support that is accessible and low stress not a little extra money that really doesn’t cover much and only if they can jump through the appropriate diagnostic hoops. In Mr Shortens statement he notes that children up to six years of age with the applicable diagnosis will be eligible to receive up to $12,000 for early intervention services with a maximum spending limit per annum of $6,000. This means that over the course of 6 years each child has an average of $2000 in funding for early intervention services. If a child needed to access even just a few of the services listed in Mr Shortens message then $2000 per annum is not going to cover much at all. As such we fall back into the issue of partially funding families to access necessary services and then leaving them to foot the bill for the remainder of the costs or watch as their loved one goes without. In my own work in the field of disability I am aware of the importance in regularity and stability for a lot of people with disabilities and the way that this funding is set up does not acknowledge the damage that can be done in ceasing or disrupting a service, in this case due to a crisis driven system that does not promote holistic long term support. If that is the case then it leads on to the possibility that whilst the intention is towards giving children with disabilities a better start, in practice more harm can be done that good if the funding does not meet the service and therapeutic requirements of that individual. If the government is truly motivated towards giving people with disabilities a great start in life and a continued great life then change needs to occur at a systemic level not the current attitude of throwing more money at the current ineffective, inefficient system. An alternative to this system that is growing in popularity within the disability sector is the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). The basis of this scheme is that everyone would be eligible to access the NDIS as a Medicare style safety net if they acquired or had a family member born with a disability. The NDIS is an insurance style system compared to the current crisis driven, welfare system that is in place. There are excellent links to the key features of the NDIS and the social, economic and inter-generational arguments for the NDIS on the main website http://www.ndis.org.au/theplan.html to give a better idea of the benefits of running with this insurance style system. As a universal system the NDIS would be accessible to everyone, it would provide the appropriate and necessary funding to ensure an acceptable quality of life to all people with disabilities and their families. Furthermore, as it is not coming from the government treasury there would be long term stability in the funding and support that was being delivered. As such families would be able to continue working and engaging in their community which would lessen instances of social isolation and people with disabilities would have access to a holistic range of services to ensure quality of life and opportunity to achieve their goals. The NDIS system would also relieve the pressure and stress caused to individuals, families and organisations by funding and the constant battle and uncertainty around where the money is going to come from to look after people with disabilities. When such a system as the NDIS exists that has the capacity to provide a significantly more stable, holistic, long term service that has the potential to save the Australian Government a significant amount of money I do wonder why the current policy direction seems to be focused on simply throwing more money at the issue in the hope it will go away.
AngelmanMum from Brisbane , Qld Friday, 6 August 2010, 09:06

Why is Angelman Syndrome excluded? It can be more severe and dibilitating that the others and the benefits of early intervention is just as great. Its extremely frustrating when these types of policies are discriminatory and many people have no idea how many people are excluded - when we look for help they assume we have access to this sort of support and dismiss us as whingers! I am very disappointed
parentingasdkid from Melbourne , Vic Thursday, 5 August 2010, 18:05

In the case of Autism - it is good to see the Australian Government making steps towards providing funding and services for this area of disability affecting so many children and adults. Providing funding for Early Childhood Intervention should extend further to 'Early Society Intervention' for Autism. I reference the UK Autism Act and Autism strategy (2010) as good examples of how a Government realises the importance of acting for the future of their nation. I'd propose a pervasive developmental disorder (PPD) act as unbrella for a number of intellectual and behavioural disabilities. This specific Act needs to work along side a strategy and the 2006 Disability act.
disappointed2010 from melbourne , victoria Saturday, 31 July 2010, 15:31

you have to do much more, bill, and you must make your commitments much clearer. learn how to define them and promote them properly. you should have done so much earlier on: this remains a problem for you. but there is a bigger problem. at the moment, your reputation has taken a very different turn, overshadowing your portfolio: where your role in dumping rudd and appointing gillard is now generally seen as a wilful act of sabotage. it seriously risks losing the ALP the election. gillard has never been popular and is performing terribly: much worse than rudd. what on earth made you think she could win? (on the other hand, who else is there is the ALP? certainly not you, bill, i'm sorry to say: you are deeply disliked across the electorate, and this is unlikely to change much, if at all: especially after all this.)
winniev1954 from Caboolture , Queensland Saturday, 31 July 2010, 06:31

It is great that you are providing more help for disabled children and so it should be but also do not forget about the wide range of adults with disabilities also I for one, my wife works part time which is all well and good but what she gets paid then centrelink takes money out of my pension, she is on a low income so she still gets a little from centrelink but what they take out of my pension leaves us with just enough to pay the rent for one week not to mention the other bills we have to pay as well, she pays her tax so why is money taken out of peoples pensions when in this situation? All I can see is it is double dipping, we as labour supporters think that the government have done a great job thus far for the country but when you have the likes of centrelink whom I might add has not got the greatest of track records seems to just do what they like and make it hard for those whom are disadvantaged does the government cover up for them, what they take out of my pension puts us right back behind the eight ball again so obviously if they do that to us then they do that to people with disabled children, it would be a good idea to look into the way that centrelink is run and what they actually do instead of letting them be self governed like they are, then you may see where the goverments money is really going.
kfbrocks from bendigo , victoria Friday, 30 July 2010, 19:30

Thanks for thinking of EI but it;s not enough! Kid's lives don't finish at 6! It might be a nice start to throw families a bone but let's not be mislead it is a bone! I want my kid to have a future and a quality of life without begging to the whims of the politicians. Why does this sound like charity rather than rights. Why is that compassionate tone have overtures or being patronising. I like you bill I think you have guts and by george we don't see much of that batting for us but lets not too pandy. We have spend tens of thousands of dollars to give our daughter a go. How much does $6,000 buy? Even in respite - it;s next too nothing. Lets stops abusing australian families, let's have real reform elts commmit big bucks to the NDIS and fix this. Bandaids may slow the bleeding but we are about to hit a massive artery! Come on you can do better - we're not stupid do what's right, right now. Kim
fionaL from Roseville , NSW Friday, 30 July 2010, 14:30

It is great that the government is putting more funding into children with disabilities. But why why why is it the same groups that get access to all the funding. I have a child with an intellectual disability and we basically get nothing, but we still have to pay for speech therapy, occupational therapy, assessments etc. My child is about to start kindergarten and I have been told by our local public school that because he does not qualify for any additional government funding there is not a lot they can do for him. Is he mean't to sit in a classroom all day and do nothing. Once again very dissappointed, and the other mob are no better. Isn't it about time that we put some time, money and effort into these children and give them the BEST start in life, so they will not be a burden on society in later years?????