Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Whither NDIS Now?

Just heard NSW Premier-in-waiting Barry O'Farrell mention the standard incoming government technique of examining the books once elected in order to find the inevitable 'Black Hole' that the previous government left, reluctantly 'forcing' the new government to take some 'tough measures.'

I think the chances are high that after finding the Black Hole that O'Farrell will take a leaf out of the WA Liberal government's Economic Audit Report (its Black Hole-finding mission) and do something similar, recommending an overhaul of the State's community services, including disability, and finding in favour of making these services more of a cost-effective, for profit market than it already is.

It will favour the big organisations in giving them greater policy-making powers, upon their commitment to run 'along business lines.' It will at best ignore advocacy and smaller, economically unattractive efforts, but more likely weed them out over time.

It will support individual funding, but in such ways that they are fully state-controlled, assessed by 'independent' assessors, and checked for fraud, tapping into a substantial national database of individual service users (oh sorry: 'consumer') records, right down to knowing a person's 'natural supports.'

It will happen because this is entirely in line with the Productivity Commission's draft NDIS report. It is also in line with the influential Centre for Social Impact , a multi-university campus research project (run by Prof Shergold, former Howard advisor, project started in dying Howard days with a $25M fund), which was and is a driving force in the WA government's push. Julia Gillard gushes over Social Impact on its website. It also is in line with the National Compact project, launched by Kevin Rudd in his day as PM. The market-economic model in social services has bipartisan support.

In essence these initiatives all use rhetoric of needs while seeking to transform being of service, care and support into a cost-effective, efficient, competition-based commercial activity as part of the market. You can clearly see this in the NDIS report, which is proposed to be run by a 'commercial board' (ok, with the obligatory consumer advisory committee appended to it). Need for support, for either inclusion or segregation, is determined by economic effectiveness. It is not based on principles or rights of equality and opportunities to rise to one's individual potential. Effective services to serve the economy, not individual people. The failed Third Way UK policies recycled in Australia?

Rarely do we ask how much disability actually arises from the disabling market-economic policies that are part and parcel of all Australian governments and political parties. Indeed the NDIS draft report itself does not discuss the possibility of any, so does not offer any real safeguards against its proposed, huge NDIA bureaucracy.

Money will be only as good as the motivations and intentions behind it. Better sort that out before any money commitment is received, because people might have to sell their soul for a sense of 'entitlement' and some support.

Will the disability movement's analysis of this economic model, and alternatives to it, emerge? Or will it and its proxies remain content in supporting the NDIS Entitlement while apparently ignoring the underlying commercial values that can undo us? The politics of hope, I know, but surely we can do better than that?

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

Wolf Wolfensberger - 1934-2011 - Thank you

Sadly, Professor Emeritus Wolf Wolfensberger died on 27th February, 2011, following a long illness. His was a very productive life, well-spent.

Dr Wolfensberger had a strong commitment to people made vulnerable in a society where individualism, utilitarianism and hedonism reign. He made a huge contribution to people with disabilities. He was a visionary, a devastating analyst and honest critic.

He was also controversial and ignited many debates, involving strong differences of view. Such is a culture of engagement with complex questions. You never had to guess at the meaning of his words. He was strongly averse to political correctness, a characteristic which earned him some critics. He was courageous in advancing and, defending his meticulously researched theories and concepts.

In 1999, seven major developmental disability organizations in the US proclaimed Dr Wolfensberger one of the 35 parties that had been the most impactful on "mental retardation" worldwide in the 20th century. Dr Wolfensberger's work was also recognised by the US magazine 'Exceptional Parent' as one of the great 7 contributions to the lives of people with disabilities, along with Salk and the polio vaccine, braille, Americans with Disabilities Act and the wheelchair.

He was perhaps best known for developing social role valorization theory from his, and Nirje's, concepts of normalisation. Social role valorization has been taught to many using and running disability services, and applied to various degrees, in government policies and service practice.

Dr Wolfensberger also developed the concept of citizen advocacy, facilitating long-term relationships between a person with disability (or other vulnerable people)and a volunteer citizen. He wrote a monograph on advocacy. He developed PASSING, a detailed methodology for assessing disability services with regard to how well they rate on meeting the needs of the people they serve. He wrote a highly practical protection schema for disabled people who are hospitalised - increasingly relevant in our efficiency- and highly short-term curative-based hospital care. Much more... he authored over 40 books and monographs, over 250 chapters in books and many journal articles.

One of his latest articles that I am aware of: How to comport ourselves in an era of shrinking resources covers as pertinent an issue as the many that he raised over his career. Controversial as always, in that article he takes a social triage approach to what might need to be done under coming, very difficult, circumstances.

Many people who have disabilities have benefited from his work in a change in focus from disability as a medical issue, or captives of care to one where a good life means living with others and in settings that are normally valued in our society. His work was instrumental in the deinstitutionalisation of thousands of people with disabilities. It has informed disability advocacy. I am aware that in his own life he personally modeled compassionate service to 'needy people', a much used Wolfensberger phrase.

He had a keen eye for the human tendency to take a concept or word and turn it into 'fads', perversions and 'crrrazes' (Dr Wolfensberger never lost some of his German tinge). To some this might merely have been funny but he would show how such fads wasted resources, or worse, cause injury to the people they were ostensibly for.

His German background was obviously important in sensitizing him to systematic patterns of devaluation of certain stigmatised categories of people, leading to their abuse and even extermination. His work and warnings on modern forms of 'death making' of people with disabilities, in genocidal proportions sits awkwardly besides modern ideas of progress.

Having attended two of his backbreaking workshops in the nineties, I can still picture him behind the lectern, passionately going through overhead after overhead, filled with schema fitting within schema: from the big picture to meaning in individual lives. Simultaneously making various corrections to his material - his critiques extended to his own work.

Love him or not, Dr Wolfensberger's work is lasting and cannot be ignored. He inspired many people, practices and policies, whether some are aware of that influence today or not. I will remember him fondly and with great respect, as I believe many will. I have learned much from his work and I thank him for his many contributions.

By all accounts, his was a life well lived,in the service of others. At one of his workshops, I asked: "if there is such a thing as imprudent profligacy - a concept he raised - then what is prudent profligacy." In answer he pointed to storing one's riches in heaven, not here. I have no insider information but I suspect that he has now found much treasure there.

Some of Dr Wolfensberger's publications:

Wolfensberger, W. (2010).How to comport ourselves in an era of shrinking resources. Intellectual & developmental Disabilities,48,2)

Wolfensberger, W. (2005). The new genocide of handicapped & afflicted people (3rd (rev) ed.). Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Training Institute for Human Service Planning, Leadership & Change Agentry.

Wolfensberger,W. (2003). The future of children with significant impairments: What parents fear and want, and what they, and others may be able to do about it. Syracuse NY. Training Institute for Service Planning, Leadership & Change Agentry. Syracuse University.

Wolfensberger,W. (1998).A brief introduction to social role valorization: A high-order concept for addressing the plight of societally devalued people, and for structuring human services. 3rd rev. edition Training Institute for Human Service Planning, Leadership and Change Agentry, Syracuse University (Syracuse, N.Y. 805 South Crouse Ave., Syracuse 13244-2280 USA)

Wolfensberger,W. (1992). A guideline on protecting the lives & health of patients in hospitals, esp0ecially if the patient is a member of a societally devalued class. Syracuse NY. Training Institute for Service Planning, Leadership & Change Agentry. Syracuse University.

Wolfensberger,W. (1977). PASSING. Program analysis of service systems implementation goals. National Institute on Mental retardation. Canada.

Wolfensberger,W. (1977). A Multi-component advocacy/protection schema. Law & mental retardation. A monograph series. Association resources Division. Canadian Association for the mentally retarded.

Wolfensberger,W. (1975).The Origin and Nature of Our Institutional Models. Human Policy.