Australians with disabilities need some positive help

[donnashuggy]

Seems like they are being punished instead and life is going to be made harder for them.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@donnashuggy wrote:

I know what you mean Crikey, many in the workforce can't think for themselves or do up their shoes yet they have a job 🙂

I was talking about the ones that have disabilities like you mention  "Of course there are many who cannot work for all sorts of reasons," a bit of job creation might help them but poddy described them as fraudsters earlier 😞

---

i think you might find that Podds was only referring to those who are hiding behind their diagnosis, and actually could work. I really don't believe that poddy was referring to those whose disabilities genuinely excluded them from working.

One of my law lecturers is a tetraplegic (she is actually the 2IC of the law school and a huge power and contributor in the NDIS and its advisory committees). I know that she is a rare occurance and an extreme example that she is able to work (she was 18 when she got sick, so before studying for her law degree)

How easy would it have been for her to believe the "experts"? Or the likes of that boy up there?

If those two can work and defy the 'experts" diagnosis (which the link I provided says is what is in question), how many others are there?

Maybe, instead of relying on the government to provide a job, SOME could benefit from study and perhaps some support from their community?

From memory, that link up there is targetting younger people and says they should either be working or studying where possible.

I agree, some can, even if neither they or the experts believe so.

I think it is good to encourage people to be the best that they can be.

now with that law lecturer up there, I am going to guess that she is on a pretty decent salary. Compare that to what she would receive on the DSP. Compare the lifestyle possible to her on that salary as opposed to the DSP. Consider the care she can take of herself as opposed to that which is provided by the government via the NDIS. She can live in her own home for starters and pay for the carers she needs.

The alternative is to move to a care facility or if she were to stay in her home and use what was provideed for by the NDIS, she would get a carer for 2 hours, 3 times a week.And THAT is to do EVERYTHING from cleaning, feeding to taking her to the bathroom!

I don't know about most people, but i go to the bathroom a few times a day, and I doubt I could just hold on until my NDIS supplied carer came three times a week, eh?

[izabsmiling]

No..it is you who may want to read the OP and other posts here.

[poddster]

if you read it carefully it makes perfect sense

Rough translation: people see what they want to see and miss the reality

[donnashuggy]

---

@poddster wrote:

Donna, you may want to re read my original post, this time instead of seeing what you want to see read the words

Made harder for these people, a good idea dont you think?

"

The Department of Human Services says its hotline has received 1,116 Medicare-related tip-offs since July 1, 2013.

Officers have investigated 275 cases, which has translated into 34 cases submitted to the Commonwealth Department of Public Prosecutions and 12 convictions.

The value of those 12 cases adds up to an estimated $474,000, with fraudsters ripping off an average of almost $40,000 each."

My reference is about people defrauding the system, did you miss the salient point?

---

You may think it is relevant to Australians with disabilites which is what the topic is about. I certainly don't. Just like I don't want to be punished on eBay for what another seller does. It's unfair, unethical and immoral.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@paintsew007 wrote:

Well if there are fraudsters on disability then should not the diagnostic procedures and the diagnosing Drs be investigated?

---

that's what tyhat link up there thast i provided is suggesting

and it's not so much that the 'experts" are assisting fraud, but from the looks, more like the actual diagnostic criteria may need a bit of fine tuning and of course, there are doctors who diagnose things which really aren't in their field of expertise so may not have a complete understanding of it or the possibilities.

[poddster]

Donna, fraud is relevant to ALL Australian taxpayers.

Re assessment of people with disabilities is a way to minimise the fraud that is inherent in  the system.

[*crikey*mate*]

Donna, did you read this link?

Easy access to welfare is over: Andrews

Mr Andrews confirmed the budget, to be delivered on Tuesday night, will introduce rules that mean some people collecting the DSP disability support pension will be reviewed for capacity to work.

That will apply to some 10-20,000 people who had gone onto the DSP in the last 5-6 years but not yet assessed under new impairment tables.

"If they are capable of working, whether it is full-time or part-time, then our expectation is that they should be working," he said.

[fourandsixpants]

I personally would think that it would be very difficult for anyone without a genuine disablity to get a diagnosis as there are quite stringent diagnostic procedures in place already, often involves the imput of three or more specialists.

But to aim and 'hit out' at the disabled.....saying that they are fraudsters because they have a diagnosis is unethical, sick and unacceptable.

[fourandsixpants]

to poddster

Donna, fraud is relevant to ALL Australian taxpayers.

Re assessment of people with disabilities is a way to minimise the fraud that is inherent in  the system.

...............................................................................................................................................................................................................

example/s please?

Proof?

Where do you get this from?!!

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@paintsew007 wrote:

I personally would think that it would be very difficult for anyone without a genuine disablity to get a diagnosis as there are quite stringent diagnostic procedures in place already, often involves the imput of three or more specialists.

But to aim and 'hit out' at the disabled.....saying that they are fraudsters because they have a diagnosis is unethical, sick and unacceptable.

---

but the question is, does the disability prevent them from working?

Surely it's got to be good for themselves in their own person, that if they can work, that they are encouraged to do so?