Open letter to John Howard: Walk a mile in our shoes

Of course this is happening just as the government is realising that our society’s approach to work is unbalanced. More able-bodied people are realising that life needs to be balanced. The union ideal of reasonable time for work, rest and play has been eroded by ridiculous commutes and the escalation of unpaid overtime.

In this context, is it fair to demand that PWDs allocate a much higher percentage of their available time and energy to work? While I respect every person’s right to make that choice, it is close to a violation of human rights to insist that a disabled person must place work above everything else. I spent three years where my life was going to work, and spending the rest of my life in bed, at the advice of a Professor of Immunology. My employer (a public hospital) refused to make the concessions needed for me to continue working. I almost lost my marriage and family until I chose to ignore the advice of this esteemed professional. Interestingly I started to recover a little as well.

I have heard this story over and over, from DSP applicants. They made the choice to give up full-time work because they wanted to save their families. They were forced into unemployment by employers who couldn’t or wouldn’t make the concessions they needed.

The time that a disabled person can allocate to work must be calculated after reasonable allowance has been made for sleep, self-care, family and leisure. What’s more, PWDs have an extra burden of time that their able bodied counterparts don’t. Given our poverty, and reduced earning capacity, we are not able to pay someone to do the domestic work that we are unable to do, or that aggravates our conditions. The availability of Home Care services, and the eligibility criteria are a joke.

Treatment programs, whether they are home, hospital or community centre based all require extra time and energy. Even the task of “remaining fit” which the Government is advocating for all people, extracts a higher toll from the disabled.

Costs

Of course, the Government assures us that these changes are not cost cutting measures, but are for the good of disabled people. Yet your own media releases mention “the cause for alarm is the escalating number of people on DSP, and the cost of this to society”. The new guidelines will simply transfer those least able to compete in a productivity-oriented society from DSP onto Newstart.

They risk losing concessions on utilities, car registration (vital if you can’t use public transport) and medicines. Many conditions can only be treated with medicines and supplements that are unavailable under the Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme. I note the recent rise in the so-called “safety net”.

It is clear that disability is the biggest factor in sucking capable people into poverty. PWDs have an average income that is 44 per cent of able-bodied people. The lucky country is the 7th worst in the OECD!

Mutual obligation - for whom?

Mutual obligation has become a buzzword. Like most buzzwords, government enthusiasm is no guarantee of substance. I actually support the proposal to assist disabled people to find work. Most people I’ve assessed for DSP tell me they want to work. They also tell me they have given up after the services available to them have failed.

In my case, despite having a degree, experience, and being motivated, the Commonwealth Rehabilitation Service told me “we cannot help you find work”, and “there’s nothing we can do for you.” Job Network did absolutely nothing. I even applied for a Job Network position but was rejected as being “not suitable” because I was seeking part-time work.