Disability, Public Policy and Advocacy
The Government's Policy Agenda
Locale of Disability Advocacy Program
Women with Disabilities Australia (WWDA) is a federating body of individuals and networks in each state and territory made up of women with disabilities and associated organisations.
WWDA seeks to ensure equal opportunities in all walks of life for all women with disabilities. In this it aims to increase awareness of, and address, issues faced by women with disabilities in the community. It links women with disabilities from around Australia, providing opportunities to identify and discuss issues of common concern. WWDA works in partnership with other disability organisations and women's organisations, and generates and disseminates information to women with disabilities, their families and carers, service providers, government and the media. WWDA is inclusive and does not discriminate against any disability.
WWDA
and the Disability Advocacy Program
The Disability Advocacy Program was established to support
advocacy services as defined in the Disability Services Act 1986.
The Program has enabled assistance for eligible organisations to
provide three types of advocacy services - self advocacy, citizen
advocacy and group advocacy which are defined under Sections 7
and 9 of the Act.
Since its inception there have been several reviews of the Program while, at the same time, advocacy services themselves have clarified and focused their role. WWDA's submission to the Disability Advocacy Program Review is made within this context of progressive change to the Program and changes within public policy debate around disabilities.
In addressing the six issue areas raised under the Terms of Reference of the Disability Advocacy Program Review, WWDA seeks to give particular emphasis to the following:
The Social Construction of Disability
The position from which people with disabilities seek to
participate fully in the community is socially constructed rather
than in direct relationship with medically defined impairment.
That is, social, economic and political realities impact directly
on, and give meaning to, the degree to which a person with an
impairment is regarded as disabled. In many respects
disabling arises from the community's response to
impairment.
These social, economic and political realities are made up of a multiplicity of factors which are reflected in a multitude of ever changing attitudes, relationships and communications. Each of these impinge on a person's ability to take part in the life of the community on an equal level with others.
Recent writers have noted that the analysis of the social construction of disability does not fully account for the experience of women with disabilities - as is the case with most current feminist analyses (Morris 1996, Meekosha 1997).
The rate at which these multiplicity of factors can change is reflected in our changing world. Community attitudes towards people with disabilities change. There are changes in community infrastructure and services which enable people with disabilities to participate more fully in the life of the community. Access to education, training and paid work has improved (though this is more for men than for women with disabilities).
A key contributor to these changes is organised advocacy – advocacy by people with disabilities, by others in the community and by the example of national and international systemic changes. Many of these positive changes and advances for people with disabilities are now more secure, through the enactment of the Disability Services Act (1986) and the Disability Discrimination Act (1992) and the enabling Commonwealth/State Disability Agreement and the Commonwealth Disability Strategy.
Advocacy, both individual and systemic, continues to play an essential part in seeking fundamental rights for people with disabilities and is strengthened in this work through both the legislation and its supporting agreements and programs.
However, the existence of legislation is not enough alone. It is through individual and systemic advocacy – for real outcomes – that conditions and integration within society can be gained for people with disabilities. Advocacy confronts discrimination from a legislative platform while also working within the wider community to educate and bring about positive, incremental changes.
Role of Advocacy in Public Policy
Disability advocacy is integral to any social, economic and
political advancement for people with disabilities. It is the
nature of advocacy that its focus will shift as changes occur in
the social and material conditions of those for whom advocacy
takes place.
For example, disability advocacy initially provided the impetus for legislative change and subsequently supported improved employment and living conditions, and improved access to mainstream services in education, training, housing, and so on. Recently, disability advocacy, including the work of WWDA, has brought to public notice the physical, sexual and financial abuse of people with disabilities in some institutional and group home settings.
Advocacy is not something which can be completed. It is dynamic and integral to the social, economic and political processes and debates in our community. Disability advocacy operates in this changing reality to:
Whether it is individual or systemic, the importance of advocacy is that it advances and maintains the debate at a community level and amongst people with disabilities so that change can occur in the reality and perception of what is valued in human persons and human behaviour. Inevitably, the parameters of this debate change as milestones are achieved and incremental gains made in the advancement of the community, and the role of people with disabilities within that community. In this context, both individual and systemic disability advocacy is linked with the broader legislative base, and the funding of advocacy services by government must be maintained.
Individual and Systemic Advocacy
Advocacy challenges the viewpoint that people with disabilities
can be treated in ways that are less than for other human
beings in terms of their needs and rights to make decisions for
themselves. A primary goal of linking individual and systemic
advocacy is to develop acceptance of difference at both a
personal level and at a community level, so that we have a
society that is inclusive of people with disabilities and one
that is responsive to their interests and human needs. Individual
and self advocacy provide critical information and experience
that enables systemic advocacy to represent the views and
experience of people with disabilities. The outcomes of systemic
advocacy can then inform the wider community of choices and
strategies to make change necessary for the inclusion of people
with disabilities.
Individual Advocacy
Individual advocacy recognises the person with disabilities as
the direct client and either advocates with that individual, or
assists them to advocate for themselves. Where possible, the
aim of individual advocacy should be to skill the person
to be able to advocate on their own behalf.
Self advocacy may be undertaken in conjunction with the family and other carers of the person or, where people are not self advocating, it may be undertaken by the family or others on behalf of the person. In other cases, where the family or other carers do not have the resources or expertise to advocate – or where it is inappropriate for them to be advocates – others may advocate on behalf of the person with disabilities, creating "bridges of understanding" between the individual, their families and carers and the person's immediate environment.
There have been significant, incremental steps over a period of time to protect and enhance the rights of people with disabilities and to respond to their needs as community members. Autonomous advocates can assist all of these processes with individual care, knowledge and expertise. Importantly, individual advocacy provides information of day by day situations upon which systemic advocacy builds a bigger picture.
Systemic Advocacy
Systemic advocacy can respond on a broader level to the immediate
needs of this significantly disadvantaged group while at the same
time analysing the information provided by individual advocacy to
inform policy directions and program developments on the needs of
individuals with disabilities. Systemic advocacy aims to ensure
that public debate and funding is focussed on responding to what
constitutes the best outcomes for the consumers – people
with disabilities.
Systemic advocacy also aims to increase the participation of people with disabilities in self advocacy and the development of public debates.
The individual and systemic advocacy undertaken by advocacy organisations to date has resulted in improved services and greater accountability mechanisms in areas such as institutional and group house set ups. This has occurred largely as a result of individual advocacy on instances of physical, sexual and financial abuse and the capacity of systemic advocacy to ensure that these individual circumstances can inform a wider public debate (Sceriha 1996).
Critically, the linkages between individual and systemic advocacy must be maintained and developed further, possibly through the establishment of appropriate information systems and ethical research.
People with disabilities make up approximately 18% of the Australian population, and women and girls are at least half of this group. Yet they are still categorised as a special interest group and their experience is isolated from the mainstream and marginalised.
Women with disabilities in Australia:
The following sections summarise priority areas of concern to WWDA where equalising opportunities for women with disabilities requires a major effort on the part of advocacy services – both at an individual and a systemic level.
Citizenship
Women with disabilities share many of the ordinary aspirations
that all women without disabilities have a right to. This
includes being part of and participating in the social life and
surrounding community within which they live. The right to such
participation in the life of the community is protected in state
and commonwealth legislation and in international conventions,
yet for women with disabilities it is still not a reality and it
is difficult for women with disabilities to attain true
citizenship (Meekosha, forthcoming). It is encouraging that the
current Federal Government is committed to encouraging people
with disabilities to access the same opportunities as those
enjoyed by the general community.
Basic Rights
Such opportunities include having the fundamental rights enjoyed
by all citizens that they should be able to feel safe, to be free
from exploitation and sexual abuse, to have access to public
services and to be able to make their own life choices.
What is an accepted part of living for people without disabilities is still at the core of what many women with disabilities aspire to. This includes being able to live independently, to be accepted for who they are, and to have their emotional and psychological needs as human beings acknowledged.
Participating in Community Life
Women with disabilities also hold expectations to participate
fully within society through relationships, caring for children
and living with dignity and respect. Participating within society
requires access to information, education, health, transport,
housing, facilities and equipment, public services and work based
and home based personal care.
Advocacy and Needs
The aspirations of women with disabilities are essentially no
different to the aspirations of women and men without
disabilities. However, women with disabilities face issues which
would not necessarily be faced by women without disabilities.
This therefore demands a careful analysis of their needs
alongside their aspirations. Advocacy plays an important role in
assisting women with disabilities to exercise full citizenship
and should be supported by government to do so.
Employment
Women with disabilities, in general, have not participated fully
in the employment revolution that has occurred for women in
Australia in the last 20 years. This is due to the double
disadvantage of both gender and disability discrimination
encountered by women with disabilities (ADACAS 1994, Pane
1995).
The 1993 Australian Bureau of Statistics Survey, 'Disability, Aging and Carers' illustrates that in terms of paid employment, the participation rate of women with disabilities trails that of men with disabilities and women without disabilities.
The participation rate of females with disabilities in the workforce was 39.9%. This contrasts with participation rates of 52.6% for men with disabilities, 65.9% for women without disabilities and 88.2% for men without disabilities. These figures show that women with disabilities are seriously disadvantaged in labour market participation.
Systemic Barriers to Employment
Barriers to paid employment can be divided into two areas:
Such advocacy needs be both systemic and individual, targeted to:
Poverty
The United Nations has recognised that women with disabilities
women with disabilities are the poorest of all groups in society.
Poverty is a fact of life for many women with disabilities who
often lack the resources to attain what is considered essential
in Australian society, including employment, adequate and
appropriate housing, nutrition and health care.
The impact of poverty on the health status and quality of life experienced by women with disabilities is undeniable. Poverty also exacerbates the negative self image that many women with disabilities have about themselves in relation to others in society.
In Australia, the social security system validates the need for, and offers income support to, women facing specific disadvantage, including women who are aged, unemployed, sick or with a disability. Additional support is available to families to assist with the costs of raising children. However, women with disabilities face extra costs directly related to disability and these costs are often not accounted for in the calculation of benefits. Women with a disability who have a waged partner can lose all benefits related to their disability.
With the increasing feminisation of poverty, women with disabilities face a bleak future unless specific interventions are made to remedy the current inequalities in resources. The government is urged to work in partnership with women with disabilities to seek these remedies.
Health Services
It is well known amongst people with disabilities that more
health research funds are directed towards the investigation of
specific disabilities rather than towards the investigation of
health for people with disabilities.
Women with disabilities have particular difficulty accessing general health information and services. For example there is little in the way of guidance for practical help in the management of general female health which means that important issues like education, menstruation, contraception, exploitative relationships, sexual assault, menopause, late onset incontinence and osteoporosis remain largely unaddressed.
Although women's health services are sometimes sympathetic, their services and that of mainstream health services and facilities are generally inaccessible for women with disabilities. There are few health services with disability specific programs.
A recent study by the Victorian branch of WWDA found that medical and health services treat women with disabilities firstly in relation to their disability and secondly to their needs as a woman (Temby 1996). This fact has been noted by other researchers who state that as long as women with disabilities are seen as less than whole people in a medical model, their anatomy will be the major focus of their identity (Blumberg 1993).
National Health Policies
Current national health policies, strategies and campaigns do not
adequately address the health needs of women with disabilities
(Cooper and Temby 1995).
The health needs of rural women with disabilities are largely unaddressed and the lack of appropriate health care in rural areas results in their remaining invisible. A result of this invisibility in rural areas is that women with disabilities are even more isolated.
The development of appropriate health models for pregnant women and mothers with disabilities is another area that is largely ignored as is the area of sexual health for women with disabilities.
Systems advocacy should be supported to bring the basic health needs of women with disabilities to the attention of government, the public, health service providers and women with disabilities so that they can be appropriately addressed. This should build on recent work by organisations such as Women With Disabilities Australia.
Violence
Many women and girls with disabilities live in situations where
their dependency on others for assistance places them in
powerless situations. Women with disabilities are targeted by
perpetrators, and can be subjected to multiple forms of violence,
including physical, psychological, sexual and financial.
Violence by attendant carers or institutional carers against women with disabilities is often not recognised by the organisation and can be tolerated by the woman because of a lack of perceived options and fear of retribution.
There are virtually no organisations set up to deal with violence against women with disabilities and many women do not know where to go for help. Most especially, where violence is occurring, services that are set up specifically to meet the needs of women often discriminate against women with disabilities, referring them to disabilities services who in turn refer them back to women's services.
It is critical that both individual and systemic advocacy should draw attention to violence against women with disabilities and support individual women as they escape situations of violence. This should build on the work currently being carried out by Women With Disabilities Australia, the Disability Council of New South Wales and others.
Wider Choices
WWDA
supports the Coalition Government's commitment to providing
people with disabilities and their families with a wider array of
choices in their lives. In particular WWDA notes the
Government's commitment to the provision of advocacy services to
people with disabilities that are disadvantaged by distance,
ethnicity, multiple disabilities or who are unable to provide
self advocacy. WWDA also notes the
Government's pre-election recognition of the importance of the
continuation of advocacy as an important element in facilitating
access and choice for people with disabilities, their families
and carers.
The Family
It is important to acknowledge and support the contribution
families provide to people with disabilities and WWDA is encouraged
by the Government's recognition that providing an economic and
social environment in which families can achieve their full
potential is crucial to maintaining a strong, cohesive and
compassionate society (Moylan 1996b).
However, WWDA rejects the proposition that "Advocacy services create barriers between people with disabilities and their family". Advocacy works in a support role to families who are seeking ways of increasing the participation of the person with disabilities within society. In these instances advocacy services can build bridges between families and the wider community while also supporting families in representing the interests of their family member with disabilities.
Furthermore, WWDA urges the government to take note of the fact that people live in different family structures. For example, there are families of origin and families of choice or destination, each of which has differing characteristics, relationships, decision making processes and power arrangements.
Family Jeopardy
However, even with additional resources and supports in place,
there are times when the family is unable to deal with internal
and external pressures. When families as carers are unable to
deal with both internal and external pressures, in spite of
additional resources, the most vulnerable member of that unit
– the person with disabilities – can be placed in
physical, economic and psychological jeopardy. Advocacy is
critical where issues of safety and quality of life needs cannot
be provided through the care of the family or where, as in many
instances, the family does not exist as a support for the person
with disabilities.
In instances where the family is a site of violence, the role of advocacy is not one of creating barriers between the person with disabilities and their family but quite properly the focus is on the safety, protection and the rights of the individual with disabilities.
In such instances, outcomes are sought that represent the person with disabilities best interests. This support identifies the person with disabilities as the primary consumer and is consistent with realising the government's goals of increasing consumer participation and better outcomes for people with disabilities. Skilled advocacy and negotiation can lead to better outcomes for all family members, even where separation has to occur.
Families as part of the Community
Families also need to be viewed within the context of a
supportive, nurturing and inclusive community which holds, as
core value, its role in assisting the families as carer. Advocacy
plays a role in communicating the needs of families to the wider
community and to the government and services. Where families
don't exist or are unable to provide appropriate support,
advocacy represents the community and its values of providing
worth, dignity and respect to the individual – within a
supportive and caring context.
Competition
As part of the government's direction of providing wider choices
for consumers a new competition environment is being created
within the health and community services sector. Competition
between government and non government providers will be a reality
as the government implements the separation of the purchaser and
provider functions of many disability services. It is essential
that accountability mechanisms are put in place to ensure that
all clients found unsuitable by some services will have their
needs met by other appropriate agencies.
However, competition alone does not create systems of services – but rather the needs of people with disabilities should determine service design and response. This is particularly important in the current Review of Advocacy Services, and the needs of women with disabilities should be sought to ensure that they are met within this new environment.
Current Accountability Mechanisms
As emphasised above, any assessment of the Advocacy Program
Objectives, in line with the Government's community services
policy agenda, needs to occur in the context of:
To date the Program's objectives and accountability mechanisms have been inferred from the definitions in the legislation, and a statement of outcomes for people with disabilities in the service agreements of funded advocacy services. This circumstance has allowed the development of a range of funded advocacy services which reflect the diversity of situations within the disabilities sector.
Combined with a view of consumer needs informed by people with disabilities themselves, this range of service provision and diversity of conditions now provides a position from which to establish:
In general, WWDA supports the findings of the review undertaken in 1995 by MGM Consultants and agrees with the general direction of its recommendations, particularly in reference to:
However, WWDA also notes that:
Specific issues of priority to WWDA, or any variance from the recommendations of MGM, are incorporated in the discussion below.
Advocacy Program Goal
The Program needs a clear goal statement and objectives
underpinning funding allocation, thus providing a strategic
direction in line with the legislative intent, consumer needs and
the Government's policy direction.
While MGM Consultants provide a suitable generic Goal for the Advocacy Program in their review, (see p.43) WWDA would argue for a more focussed Goal statement which clearly describes the purpose of the Program rather than a more general principle of advocacy work.
The Goal statement needs to:
WWDA proposes the following Goal Statement for the Disability Advocacy Program:
GOAL STATEMENT
Program Aims and Objectives
Program Aims and Objectives need to delineate clear policy
directions and strategic milestones for the Program – in
line with the Goal and linked to the legislative intent, consumer
needs and the Government's policy direction.
These Aims and Objectives should reflect also the existing diversity of advocacy service provision in order to ensure that a full range of advocacy service is maintained from which consumers can make choices.
Aims
WWDA
supports simplifying the existing categories of self advocacy,
citizen advocacy and group advocacy into individual and systemic
advocacy and defining these within the following Aims:
Aim 1: To provide support and training to individuals with disabilities (and where appropriate their families and carers) who are seeking recognition for and full participation in the life of the community.
Aim 2: To take action which influences or produces systemic change to ensure that people with disabilities can achieve:
Objectives
A range of Program Objectives should be developed in support of
each of these Aims and these should be developed in consultation
with consumers and advocacy services.
Several drafts of such Objectives have been written since the inception of the Program and are included in various Departmental documents under headings such as Self Advocacy, Citizen Advocacy, Parent Advocacy, Group Advocacy, etc.
New Objectives should:
These Objectives should be reviewed every five years in light of achievements of milestones. WWDA is particularly concerned to see that the interests of women with disabilities are reflected in the Program Objectives, and that these are articulated in their own right as well as being integrated into all other Objectives.
Descriptors reflecting the particular concerns of women with disabilities which should be included in Program Objectives include:
Guiding Principles, Practice Standards and Operational
Protocols
WWDA
supports a diversity of advocacy services which reflects the
diversity of need within the sector and assists in equalising
resource distribution across a range of disability areas.
In this context, the Government needs to be assured that advocacy services are provided by organisations with clear goals and organisational structures. The MGM report indicates that funded organisations see this as a priority for Government and for organisations themselves. However, rather than focus Departmental attention on strategic, organisational frameworks (mission, goal, objectives, etc.) a more productive approach is to support the introduction of an agreed set of guiding principles, practice standards and operational protocols for advocacy.
Guiding Principles – Code of Practice
The National Advocacy Workshop in June 1994 agreed on a minimum
set of principles for advocacy. In 1995 MGM Consultants sought
feedback on this minimum set and reported "considerable agreement
that these are all important core principles for advocacy."
These principles are:
The Principles outlined should be incorporated into a formal Disability Advocacy Code of Practice or Code of Ethics at some later date. (See also MGM Report p. 83.) Funding should be conditional on acceptance of these set of operational principles.
Advocacy Practice Standards
MGM indicates the strong support in the sector to the development
of Advocacy Practice Standards (p82). WWDA urges the
development of such standards for the following reasons:
WWDA is of the strong view that it is not possible for disability service providers to provide advocacy services without either an actual or perceived conflict of interest. However, the recent review of Service Standards for Disability Services should be considered in the light of their potential to link with and inform Practice Standards for Disability Advocacy.
WWDA believes that at least three of the eleven Standards need to be linked to advocacy services in order to be implemented across the range of disabilities. These are:
Standard 2: Individual Needs
Each person with a disability receives a service which is
designed to meet, in the least restrictive way, his or her
individual needs and personal goals.
Standard 3: Decision Making and Choice
Each person with a disability has the opportunity to participate
as fully as possible in making decision about the events and
activities of his or her daily life in relation to the service he
or she receives.
Standard 7: Complaints and Disputes
Each consumer is free to raise and have resolved any complaints
or disputes he or she may have regarding the agency or
service.
Other Standards around Access, Privacy, Dignity and Confidentiality, Participation and Integration, Valued Stakes, Service Management, and Employment, Conditions, Support and Skills Development also lend themselves to linkages with advocacy services.
A working party with a majority of consumer controlled advocacy organisations and consumer oriented peak bodies should be set up to:
Operational Protocols
Operational protocols have been initiated in other social and
community services sectors, such as those developed in some
States for sexual assault workers, police, hospitals, and Public
Prosecutions. WWDA supports the
development of protocols, based on practice standards, especially
for some situations requiring individual advocacy - such as where
there is a relationship of violence between consumers of an
advocacy service.
Outcomes, Indicators and Unit Costs
WWDA
supports outputs/outcomes based funded with measurable indicators
and associated unit costs where outputs and
outcomes are understood to represent quantitative
and qualitative results of advocacy work undertaken in the
interests of people with disabilities. In supporting and
outputs/outcomes based funding WWDA wishes to
emphasise the sectors' overall disquiet in this approach and
recommends that its introduction be done in full consultation
with services and consumer organisations.
Furthermore, WWDA rejects a model of unit costs based on a case mix model which is then the basis for funding. By its nature, advocacy does not fit neatly into such categories and is not a process by which people enter into certain categories of negotiated activity. The opportunities for exploitation by both funding bodies and advocacy services under such a system would require Departmental attention to monitoring the system rather than the advocacy outputs/outcomes.
Whatever the funding model and whatever the process undertaken in providing advocacy services, advocacy should be focussed clearly on achieving measurable results for people with disabilities and these outputs/outcomes need to be clearly spelled out by each advocacy service in terms of the change that has been sought or taken place. For example, is the resulting change one of information, knowledge or understanding, is it legislative, is it in relationships, is it changed status, etc?
Both qualitative and quantitative measures and derivative unit costs can be drawn from each organisation establishing proper outputs/outcomes and indicators for advocacy work undertaken. The requirement should be for funded services to outline these in their service agreement. These should be reviewed after two years to establish whether overarching outcome and output measures and generic unit costs make sense. To move directly to generic unit costs at this stage is pre-emptive and nonsensical.
The MGM report outlines several outcomes supported by the sector which could serve as a starting point in requiring these in the service agreements of advocacy services (See pp 72-79).
In addition, WWDA notes that the Working Party reviewing the Disability Service Standards has been reconvened to:
WWDA recommends that a working party with a majority of consumer controlled advocacy organisations and consumer oriented peak bodies be set up to consider possible links and applicability of this work to the establishment of qualitative and quantitative outcome/output measures and unit costs in advocacy services.
The Disability Advocacy sector contributes remarkable energy and effort into improving the position of people with disabilities and it gains considerable results from the work undertaken. The contribution from the non-government sector, together with additional voluntary contributions from people with disabilities, their families and carers means overwhelming cost effectiveness for Government from funding these Advocacy Services.
The requirement is now on the Department to ensure that this work can be undertaken more effectively and smoothly to the benefit of all people with disabilities so that its current value for money is enhanced.
There is a demonstrated need for both specialist and generic services in advocacy. Some specialist services are needed, but it is imperative that generic services are maintained and increased so that the broader analysis of disability within the community is continued. Disability is essentially socially constructed, and many issues that people with disabilities face are not confined to a diagnostic category, eg discrimination in the workplace.
WWDA urges the continuation of funding a diversity of agencies in order to reflect the diversity of need within the sector.
As emphasised throughout this submission, WWDA is concerned to ensure that issues relating to the particular needs of women with disabilities are given proper consideration through ensuring that these needs are taken into account by all advocacy services and that advocacy services addressing the particular needs of women with disabilities are properly resourced.
Organisations need to be resourced to overcome geographic distance to effectively reach rural and remote women with disabilities.
The structure of the Advocacy Program should ensure that people with disabilities with dual disabilities can receive appropriate services. For example, people with both intellectual disability and behavioural issues are often referred back and forth, and can miss out on services altogether. Standards, protocols and the maintenance of generic services are ways to address this issue.
WWDA also notes the lack of advocacy available for Indigenous women with disabilities and the need for this to be addressed.
WWDA recommends the investigation of different models for reaching people who are doubly, or triply disadvantaged. For example, attaching special advocacy services for women with disabilities to general advocacy services and specialist women's services such as Women's Legal Resource Centres, gender training for advocacy services and an array of specialist women's advocacy services should be considered. The needs of women from non English speaking backgrounds should be particularly addressed.
It is difficult to ascertain whether there is duplication of systemic advocacy services in the sector. However, WWDA believes there is scope to develop better links between individual and systemic advocacy services and to develop flexibility best practice models.
WWDA recommends that flexibility in systemic advocacy service provision be encouraged to reflect the diversity of need within the sector and to establish best practice examples linked with Practice Standards.
WWDA is aware of suggestions that the Disability Advocacy Program move to the Attorney General's Department. Such a move could emphasise the necessary autonomy of advocacy from the disabilities services providers and the major funding body.
However, the Attorney General's Department has experience with legal models of advocacy and there are concerns that this would lead to a more legalistic and adversarial approach rather than one which supports incremental, community focussed change. If this move were to occur, WWDA supports the appointment of disability and advocacy trained personnel within the Attorney General's Department.
WWDA urges the Government to take note of the fact that women with disabilities are not a separate group simply because of the degree of discrimination imposed on this significant proportion of the Australian population by society. Their marginalisation is one that requires addressing through individual and systemic advocacy.
Individual advocacy directly assists in improving the social and material conditions of life experienced by women with disabilities. Systemic advocacy can take these individual experiences and provide information and critiques to policy makers, community leaders and the wider community, thereby informing and stimulating public debate. This is essential to the full participation by women with disabilities in the diverse life of our community.
WWDA plays an important role in providing a voice for women with disabilities at a policy, program and service level and in communicating their needs directly to government. This role is not fulfilled by any other organisation in the disability or women's sector. A broader community goal of WWDA is to develop acceptance of difference so that we have an Australian society that is inclusive of people with disabilities and one that is responsive to their interest and human needs.
The Disability Advocacy Program currently supports this goal and should be maintained through a more focussed Program which is underpinned by a recognition that:
Section 2.2
Legislation alone will not meet the challenges posed to people
with disabilities by the consequences social response to
disability. Advocacy is a key component of informing debate and
implementing legislative projections and funding for advocacy by
the Commonwealth government should be maintained.
Section 2.3
Linkages between individual and systemic advocacy should be
maintained and developed further. This could be done through the
establishment of appropriate information systems, national
training and development, and ethical research.
Section 3.1
Advocacy plays an important role in assisting women with
disabilities to exercise full citizenship and should be supported
by government to do so.
Section 3.2
Individual and systemic advocacy directed at productive
employment for women with disabilities is critical in equalising
the opportunities for women with disabilities to increase their
paid employment rate and enabling women with disabilities to have
real choices and resources appropriate to quality of life.
Systemic and individual advocacy should be resourced, and
targeted to:
Section 3.3
With the increasing feminisation of poverty, women with
disabilities face a bleak future. Systemic advocacy is needed to
identify issues, research and analyse, and recommend
remedies.
Section 3.4
Systemic advocacy should be supported to identify appropriate
areas for research which addresses the health needs of women with
disabilities. This research would be used by government to
develop appropriate health care structures.
Section 3.5
Individual and systemic advocacy should be resourced to continue
to analyse, research, consult and encourage collaboration to
address the issue of violence against women with
disabilities.
Section 4.2
WWDA
urges the government to take note of the fact that people live in
different kinds of family. For example, there are families of
origin and families of choice or destination, each of which has
differing characteristics, relationships, decision making
processes and power arrangements.
Section 5.1
In general WWDA supports the
1995 report by MGM Consultants, but also notes that:
Section 5.2
WWDA
proposes the following Goal Statement for the Disability Advocacy
Program:
To ensure that a full range of advocacy services are available for the following purposes:
Section 5.3
WWDA
supports simplifying the existing categories of self advocacy,
citizen advocacy and group advocacy into individual and systemic
advocacy and defining these within the following Aims:
Aim 1: To provide support and training for self advocacy to individuals with disabilities (and where appropriate their families and carers) who are seeking recognition for and full participation in the life of the community.
Aim 2: To take action which influences or produces systemic change to ensure that people with disabilities can achieve:
Section 5.3: Objectives
A range of Program Objectives should be developed in support of
each of the above Aims and these should be developed in
consultation with consumers and advocacy services.
New Objectives should:
These Objectives should be reviewed every five years in light of achievements of milestones.
Section 5.4: Advocacy Principles
The Principles outlined in MGM Report p. 83 should be
incorporated into a formal Disability Advocacy Code of Practice
or Code of Ethics at some later date. Funding should be
conditional on acceptance of these set of operational
principles.
Section 5.4: Advocacy Practice Standards
WWDA
recommends that a working party with a majority of consumer
controlled advocacy organisations and consumer oriented peak
bodies should be set up to:
Section 5.4: Operational Protocols
WWDA
recommends the development of operational protocols, based on
practice standards.
Section 5.5
WWDA
supports outputs/outcomes based funded with measurable indicators
and associated unit costs where outputs and
outcomes are understood to represent quantitative
and qualitative results of advocacy work undertaken in the
interests of people with disabilities. Both qualitative and
quantitative measures and derivative unit costs can be drawn from
each organisation establishing proper outputs/outcomes and
indicators for advocacy work undertaken. The requirement should
be for funded services to outline these in their service
agreement.
These should be reviewed after two years to establish whether overarching outcome and output measures and generic unit costs make sense. In addition, WWDA notes that the Working Party reviewing the Disability Service Standards has been reconvened to:
WWDA recommends that a working party with a majority of consumer controlled advocacy organisations and consumer oriented peak bodies be set up to consider possible links and applicability of this work to the establishment of qualitative and quantitative outcome/output measures and unit costs in advocacy services.
Section 7
WWDA
recommends the continuation of funding a diversity of agencies in
order to reflect the diversity of need within the sector.
Section 8
WWDA
recommends investigation of a range of delivery models for
advocacy services for women with disabilities. WWDA also
recommends that models for linking systemic and individual
advocacy be investigated.
Section 9
WWDA
recommends that flexibility in systemic advocacy service
provision be encouraged to reflect the diversity of need within
the sector and to establish best practice examples linked with
Practice Standards.
ADACAS, 1994, 'Young women with disabilities and employment: A study to investigate the needs of young women with disabilities and their access to a range of employment option in the ACT', Ageing, Disability and Carer Advocacy Service of the ACT.
Anderson I, 1996, 'The status of women with disabilities in Australia', Women With Disabilities Australia, Canberra.
Blumberg, L. 1993 , 'The personal is political - medical attitudes towards disability', Health/PAC Bulletin, Summer 35-37.
Cooper,M and Temby, D. 1995 'In the hands of the receivers', paper presented National Women's Health Network Conference, Canberra 17-19 November 1995.
Meekosha, H 1997, Body battles; 'blind spots' in feminist theory, Shakespeare, T (ed) Breaking the barriers, Cassell, London.
Meekosha, H forthcoming, 'Enabling Citizenship: Gender, disability and citizenship in Australia'.
Morris, Jenny 1996, Pride against prejudice, Women's Press, London.
Moylan, Judi, 1996, Opening Address to the 1996 National Federation of Blind Citizens of Australia Convention, Albury NSW, 7 June 1996.
Moylan, Judi, 1996 'Strengthening Families', Budget statement.
Pane, L 1995, 'Emerging from the shadows', Women With Disabilities Australia, Canberra.
Sceriha, M 1996 'Let Down the Drawbridge - Women with disabilities and domestic violence'; paper presented to the National Domestic Violence Summit, Parliament House Canberra, September 1996.
Temby, D 1996, 'More and less: A report of health and well-being experiences of Victorian women with physical disabilities and the nature and range of health and community services they use and want', Victorian Women With Disabilities Network, Melbourne.
This site was developed by Carolyn Frohmader for Women With Disabilities Australia.