[FEAT BC Admin]

In this topic area, discussion is about the fight to secure Government funding for your A.B.A. treatment program. It is also the place to talk about your thoughts and ideas about how to establish new Government programs specifically designed for autism treatment.

This is the place to hear input from parents who have fought for funding and won, as well as those who have fought for funding and would like to share their horror stories. There is a tendency to not share success stories once funding is secured. Please fight that tendency. By sharing our experience, we all become stronger.

 

---

—-By FEAT BC (Freeman) on Saturday, January 3, 1998 – 03:16 pm:

-Hi everyone!

These are some things to think about in your dealings with government to help you to obtain support for your child’s Autism Treatment Program. These are my personal opinions and do not represent those of FEAT of BC or any other organization.

Many of these observations are based on my personal experiences (and I believe it poetic justice to help every parent avoid being systematically abused by their social worker the way I was).

Good luck to everyone! (Let’s all pull back the curtain on the Wizard of OZ).

Sabrina

 

---

How To Fight for Funding for Autism Treatment and Appropriate School Placement

1. Establish a Paper Trail

Always take notes, documenting major points of all conversations with government and school officials.

This includes casual, in person conversations with social workers as well as ALL telephone conversations. All key points of discussion must be written down in your notes including the date and time of the discussion. This includes what was agreed upon, as well as what was not agreed upon.

Then the notes should be used to write a letter recapping the substance and content of the conversation. This letter must then be mailed or faxed to the person with whom you had the conversation. In addition, a copy must be kept in your file (see section on the icci game).

Why?

It is important to formalize the interaction between you and Government officials. In addition, everyone is put on notice that they must closely adhere to their responsibilities, regulations and laws., Furthermore, they must then consider the paper trail you have created. This lets everyone know that the interaction can become public and that any abuses of power and authority can be formally appealed and/or publicized.

In other words, they canit use discretion unfairly under the cloak of secrecy.

2. Submit all Requests in Writing

All your requests for your child must be submitted formally in writing with a copy included in your file and a copy, if necessary, sent to their immediate superiors.

3. Set Deadlines for Action

All formal requests for action must have a reasonable deadline set for that action. If no action or response is received by the deadline you have set (two weeks for example), then you will interpret the lack of response as a formal declination (a formal NO) of your requests.

Why Set Deadlines?

When bureaucrats do not want to do something, they will stall by ignoring you and your request. (As an aside, in the study of the bureaucracy, this is known as ithe power to do nothingi). They can string you along for years. When you have determined that the person you are interacting with is not inclined to help you or is not dealing in good faith, then you must take the initiative and formally label his/her behavior as obstructionist and de facto as a declination (a NO to your requests). This allows you to move to the next level of authority on your timetable to present your case. This takes the power to do nothing away from the bureaucrat with whom you are dealing. Simple stated, a bureaucrat who stalls and does nothing becomes irrelevant (use your invisible spray) and you move on to the next level of authority.

How to icci?

A cc. is a copy of your letter sent to someone other than the person you are writing. You put the cc. at the bottom left-hand corner of your letter followed by 2 spaces and the name of the person or people to whom you want to send a copy of the letter.

Who to icci to?

Sometimes it is best not to icci at all, especially in the early stages of the relationship (for example, your first letter to a social worker requesting assistance). This gives them the opportunity to do the right thing and does not present you as an overly combative person. When you start to run into problems, it is a good idea to send the icci to the 2 immediate superiors of the person you are having problems with. We do not recommend icciing all the way up the chain of command, since you want to give them a chance to solve the problem at the local level.

Why send a icci copy?

The reason for playing the icci game is that you want your interactions with the official to be known to his superior and possibly to other organizations so that 1) their action or inaction becomes a matter of record and 2) the individual knows he is being monitored. This helps minimize abuses of power and authority and helps encourage the official to meet their obligations and do the right thing.

What is the sequence of letters?

Find out the chain of command of the particular bureaucracy you are battling.

TOP

Minister
Deputy Minister
Children’s Ministry’s local region chain of command, all the way down to the District Supervisor
and Social Worker
Contacts can be found at the government directory: http://www.dir.gov.bc.ca/

BOTTOM

Start at the bottom and climb. At the Regional Operating Officer (ROO) level (once you have been declined) you have to decide whether to jump up to the top, threaten and then go to the media, or both. A word of wisdom: DO NOT BLUFF. If you are not willing to go all the way, they will ‘smell’ this. You must be prepared to take it right up to the Minister and beyond.

Documentation from Experts:

In your arsenal to fight for your child, it is wise to get his/her pediatrician and/or psychiatrist to write a letter on your childis behalf. In addition, any other experts who know your child and are sympathetic to what you are trying to do should become involved.

When to hire a lawyer?

If money is not an issue, you can hire a lawyer when you get to the area manager level. Make sure that you have a paper trail so the lawyer has something to work with. Also, have the lawyer give F.E.A.T. of B.C. a call, and we will send him/her information that will help.

If money is an issue (as it is for most of us running autism treatment programs), you might want to hire a lawyer once you have been turned down by the Minister.

How to hire a lawyer?

The type of lawyer needed is a litigator, or trial lawyer. S/he does not need to be an expert in autism, or special needs; s/he needs to be experienced in suing governments, and enjoys being in court. Word of mouth is a good way to find a lawyer.

Topic

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Bravo to the brave mother who managed to get into the Trudeau “town hall” meeting in Halifax and ask him to get the federal government to do something since the provinces are not doing what needs to be done.  CTV carried an interview with the lady before the event and then a report about what happened when she asked the PM about autism policies.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/mom-who-quit-job-to-care-for-son-with-autism-questions-trudeau-about-national-crisis-1.3752767

Obviously, this kind of lobbying is tremendously helpful for our cause and I think we all appreciate what the mother has done to raise the profile of our common challenge. I hope more mothers and fathers will show up at other town halls and keep the drum beat going.

However, while I believe we all understand what the lady is going through (I know I sure do), what frustrates me is the inconsistent message from our community to the media and the politicians.  In the interview the lady was asked what does she expect the federal government to do since healthcare is a provincial jurisdiction matter.  While she did mention the Senate report of 2007 and the call for action, she did not describe what that key recommendations or issues were (the key recommendation was for the negotiation of a funding formula to pay for “autism therapy”).

Instead, she went on to refer to the government’s rejection of the “Canadian Autism Partnership” (CAP) proposal as an example of government inaction and suggested that rejection of the CAP proposal is the closest we’ve come to a “National Autism Strategy” (NAS).  Huh? I just did a search of the term “National Autism Strategy” in the executive summary report of the CAP proposal and the term does not come up once in the report.  The Senate report recommended the development of a NAS, but I did not see any such recommendation in the CAP executive summary report. CAP merely proposed the government spend millions to set up a bureaucracy that would engage in consultations, issue-identification, etc.

This kind of confusion is not surprising given that no autism authority or group has proposed a definition of a National Autism Strategy or draft model that has (at least, none that I am aware of) received widespread community endorsement and support.  Thus, even though many of us use the term, it is not necessarily clear that we are thinking about the same thing.  Now that we have some politicians finally using the term (usually those in opposition, although I cannot recall ever hearing Mike Lake use the term), it may be time for the community to move beyond using the term in the abstract and now try to get a little more concrete about what such a strategy should consist of.

The other reason of course for the confusion is that the CAP proposal and its supporters have done a remarkable job of portraying the proposal as the answer to all our problems. The CAP report actually states: “The development and implementation of CAP represents a comprehensive solution that will address systemic issues and complex needs of individuals on the Autism Spectrum” (p. 1). How can the creation of a bureaucracy constitute a “comprehensive solution” to anything apart from the possible previous unemployment problem of the newly-hired bureaucrats?  During the debates last year in the House of Commons the former Conservative Party leadership candidate Erin O’Toole even referred to the CAP proposal as a national “program”.  Program for what?  Where?

I liked the part where the lady in the interview indicated that research does not help people on the ground.  However, she went on to say that we need to identify “best practices”.  That is the typical message from the CAP project and its supporters.   The issue of which marketed “autism therapies” work, and which don’t, has already been studied many times.  We don’t need more study of best practices (especially since it appears to many of us that across Canada none of the practices regarding the delivery of treatment, or supports in school, or adult housing, etc. can be characterized as “best”). We need to implement best practices, not study it.

The article appears to suggest that the PM Trudeau responded to her the same way he and other Liberals responded in the House last year….we’re funding research and support advocacy, bla, bla, etc.

How about asking the PM why does the federal government negotiate and fund health accords that continue the Medicare discrimination against autism treatment? Why not use the negotiations to develop national standards for the inclusion of autism treatment under Medicare?  Why not ask the PM about his government adopting his party’s policy resolution on funding autism treatment in Medicare? Why not include in the “Mandate Letter” to the Minister of Health the development of a National Autism Strategy that would see autism treatment made available under Medicare from coast to coast? etc.

 

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, it is that time of the year again.  In the annual political cycle of the Ottawa “fiscal year”, the end (March 31) is coming up.  Usually, at this time of the year, the officials at the Department of Finance are putting some finishing touches on what will be a budget for 2018-19 which will (usually) be tabled in the second half of February.  More than any other government document (e.g., election platforms, speeches from the throne, etc.), the budget is the most authoritative reflection of where the government stands on public policy items.

So, if the Minister of Finance is consulting with his Cabinet colleagues and asking them “who needs what?” and “where can we help?”, I hope that someone around the table will give him a copy of this:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/autism-boy-family-resources-carly-sutherland-1.4478816

If the Minister thinks that such sad stories only occur from time to time on the East Coast, then I hope someone will give the Minister a copy of this:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/angie-robert-robinson-inclusion-inquest-1.3289375

It is absolutely unbelievable that in a wealthy and democratic county like Canada parents of such disabled children would have to either reveal their most painful and private personal challenges in the media to try to get Government attention and help, and that in some cases the attention only comes after it is too late.

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

What’s the most recent figure on prevalence rates for Autism Spectrum Disorders?

Another study just published in the U.S. appears to suggest that it is now 1 in 41.  1 in 41!!!  Are the Ministers of Health listening?

I wonder if the CDC (which seems to have been the historic source for authoritative rates) will confirm this.  The article seems to be a little confused. While reporting what seems to be a huge increase in the rate since the last generally-accepted figure of 1 in 68, the article appears to suggest that things have “stabilized”.  What?  The trend is clear…the prevalence rates have been going steadily upward over the past decade.  I’m not sure how one can suggest that the trend has suddenly stopped when this figure of 1 in 48 is certainly new and suggests a continuation of an alarming trend.

It will be most interesting to see what the Canadian “Public Health Agency of Canada” will report this year as they are apparently in the process of preparing a Canadian “first”…the first ever all-Canadian report on ASD prevalence rates.  One can guess what the report may contain. I suspect there will be a lot of explanation about the difficulty of gathering reliable statistics across the country, and even though the Dominion Bureau of Statistics (now called “StatsCan” or something) was created in 1918 (a full century ago) and can tell you on an annual basis how many cherries were produced across Canada every summer, the counting of people with ASD is not easy and the stats for ASD prevalence rates across Canada have to have the “margin or error” or a public opinion survey, etc. followed by some discussion of why the U.S. figures are unreliable or not applicable to Canada because….we’re different or something.  I actually have not been this eager to read an expected government report in a long time.  Hopefully, it will be a useful report that will help to improve public policy.

Below are the first paragraphs from the article contained at this link:

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-autism-rates-appear-to-be-stabilizing/

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay January 2, 2018, 2:48 PM

<h1 class=”title”>U.S. autism rates appear to be stabilizing, new study suggests</h1>
Autism rates are much higher than originally thought but may have stabilized in recent years, a new study suggests.

An estimated 2.41 percent of children in the United States have autism spectrum disorder, according to a new analysis of data from the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH). The most recent previous estimate put autism rates at 1.47 percent in 2010, researchers from the new study said.

“The prevalence of autism spectrum disorder is much higher than previously thought,” said senior author Dr. Wei Bao, an epidemiologist with the University of Iowa College of Public Health.

Autism spectrum disorders now affects about 1 of every 41 children, a huge increase in autism from previous decades, Bao said.

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

I came across this article by a parent of a child with autism who expresses some frustration about the frequency with which strangers ask him “Does your son have a special talent?” as soon as they find out his unusual behavior is a result of autism.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/dec/30/seen-rain-man-that-doesnt-mean-you-know-my-autistic-son

I have had this experience much too often, as I suspect many of you have as well, and I often reflect on how to react.  When I protested on the Hill years ago I remember one specific individual came up to me and said something along the lines of “You’re so lucky! What’s his special talent?”   While I often found myself explaining to strangers that the movie “Rain Man” did not depict typical or average autism cases, over time this exercise can become tiresome.

Recently, I was walking down the street with my son and he started acting up.  I saw an older gentleman on his lawn and he said something to me. I stopped and asked him to repeat it because I did not hear it.  He seemed like a nice fellow and asked me about my son.  I did not particularly feel like talking to a stranger about my son and his health issues, so we exchanged some pleasantries, and then the guy asked me “So what’s his special talent?”.  I politely suggested to him that the question is one posed by many people who watch too much Hollywood stuff, but he insisted and added “You just have not found it yet”.  Gee, thanks.

The next day I was at a grocery store with my son and sure enough, the cashier asked me the same question.

Ok,….so what am I getting at?  It seems to me that in many ways the years of “autism awareness” activities by so many charities and “autism societies”, etc. have largely been ineffectual.  While high functioning individuals with “special talents” may find themselves being recognized in some fashion more frequently, as a parent of a low functioning child with autism, I have often been disappointed by  the “awareness” campaigns and events that struck me as doing a poor job of raising any awareness of the challenges faced by low functioning people with autism and their families.

My favourite examples occur every year in Ottawa with these “Autism on the Hill” rallies.  Besides getting a few politicians to give the usual political speeches with some “feel good” expressions of support, the events always seem to involve some high functioning people giving these flawless speeches. Two years ago there were two teens who spoke and were absolutely perfect in their speaking skills and delivery of their prepared speeches.  Communication impairment?  Where?

Last year they had two memorable speakers.  One was bilingual and the other was finishing a masters degree at university in disability studies.  Needless to say, getting off the waiting list for a government ABA program or fundraising to pay for a private program was not referred to in their speeches.

If there was anyone in the audience who had no idea what autism was and was interested in learning about it, these rallies to promote “autism awareness” would have given them the impression that people with autism are … fine.

And then there’s Mike Lake.

Although his own son is non-verbal, he concluded his speech by saying that people should listen to the “self-advocates” because … I’m trying to remember exactly his words now…it was something like “they are the most authoritative” or “most important spokespersons” or something like that.  Really Mike?  Those who can speak so well that they can advocate for themselves (thank you very much) are the best spokespersons for your son and others like him?  Really?  Respectfully, I disagree.  While those “self-advocates” could potentially be great reps and potentially advance “autism awareness” a lot, my observation is that they don’t do much to raise awareness of the conditions regarding those who cannot advocate for themselves. So who does?  We, parents.  And despite all these years of the Autism Societies promoting “autism awareness”, I suspect that being asked “So what special talent does your son have?” will be a question that I will likely have to deal with for many years to come.

Anyways, I’m really glad the other parent wrote an article about the issue.

[bsharpe]

Season’s Greetings everyone!

Here is the latest edition of the Association in Autism Treatment!  This is a free publication and I encourage everyone to

sign up!  The Association for Science in Autism Treatment is an organization promoting applied behavior analysis and other autism therapies supported by scientific research and opposing autism therapies without scientific evidence.

Here it is!

https://www.asatonline.org/siat-fall-2017-issue-1/

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Parliament rose for the holidays and won’t apparently resume sitting until January 29.  During the last day in the Senate there was a question dealing with autism and the disability tax credit and some sort of advisory board that the autism community was excluded from, etc. (see below).

On a separate note, I would like to wish you all in FEAT BC land all the best for the holiday season and the coming new year!

Cheers,

Andrew Kavchak, Ottawa

Senate Debates, Thursday, December 14, 2017:
<h2 id=”54″>National Revenue</h2>
<h2>Disability Tax Credit</h2>
<b>Hon. Jim Munson: </b>My question is for the Government Representative in the Senate. This issue was brought up last week by Senator Housakos dealing with the arbitrary decisions by CRA on giving out money for tax disability and registered disability credits.

Last week, Senator Housakos asked about the inconsistency between approvals and denials of families with children on the autism spectrum. Since that time, we saw the reinstatement of a Disability Advisory Committee, which is an essential step. We gave recommendations to the minister’s office. We were asked to do that, but the autism community was ignored, yet Diabetes Canada and 11 other groups are now sitting on that advisory board. Could you explain why autism groups were ignored?

<b>Hon. Peter Harder (Government Representative in the Senate): </b>I thank the honourable senator for his question. I do know that the Minister of Health has been made aware of this concern and has undertaken to speak directly to her colleague, the minister responsible for the CRA. I make that undertaking on your behalf as well.

<b>Senator Munson: </b>I appreciate that very much because it’s the autism community that has been hit hard by this. There are grandparents and parents who have been receiving credits to help out their grandchildren when they were gone and now they are being denied. It’s not just one or two; it’s many. It seems to me it represents a disconnect with the tax credit evaluation forms and the disability itself.

Something which is really important for CRA to understand is that autism is not a mental health disability, yet that’s where it’s listed and there are still no autism groups on that advisory committee.

This is a message not for you, Senator Harder, but for CRA. For the record, autism is a neurodevelopment disorder. It is an intellectual disability, characterized by social interaction, verbal and non-verbal communication, and restricted and repetitive behaviour, amongst many other symptoms. You know all that. So how can there be any fairness on the Disability Advisory Committee for those with autism when all specific organizations that represent these Canadians were left out? How can we be reassured that Canadians with autism will not be overlooked in the future?

<b>Senator Harder: </b>Again senator, I make a commitment to ensure that your concerns and the concerns of others in this chamber, expressed here as well as elsewhere, are brought to the attention of the minister concerned.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

I was listening to CBC’s “Sunday Edition” on the radio this morning and at the end of the third hour there was a clip of a recent speech by Beverley McLaughlin about her upcoming retirement from the Supreme Court of Canada.  Then Michael Enright stated he would have a feature interview with her next week.  Presumably they will record it during the week.

So I just wrote a message to the Sunday Edition on their “contact us” webpage, with the following message (copied below).  If any of you would like to similarly make a suggestion to the CBC on what to ask Madame “don’t do as I do, do as I say”, the Sunday Edition can be reached at: http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/contact

My message to the CBC:

At the end of today’s show you indicated that you will interview the retiring SCC Chief Justice next week. I hope that you will be able to ask her this question during your interview with her (which I assume will be pre-recorded sometime this week).

Background: I am a parent of a child with autism. When my son was diagnosed we got absolutely no help from Medicare to provide him with Intensive Behaviour Intervention (IBI) therapy based on the principles of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA). We had to resort to the private sector and the cost to us in the first year was over $40,000. This treatment for autism has been the subject of many medical and scientific studies since the breakthrough study by Ivar Lovaas in the 1980s about the benefits of IBI/ABA treatment for kids with autism.

However, there was a case from B.C….the “Auton” case. The families of kids with autism alleged discrimination in Medicare because this core health care need was not served. The families won at the BC Supreme Court. The province appealed and the families won at the BC Court of Appeal. So the province appealed it to the SCC.

I was the lone protestor on the lawn of the SCC in June of 2004 during the court hearings and I hoped that the court decision would affirm the lower courts and provide coast-to-coast relief for families of autistic children who were facing catastrophic expenses trying to help their kids get better.

Of course, every government, federal and provincial, intervened and warned that if the SCC were to dictate what the provinces had to provide under Medicare, the sky would fall and we would encounter an apocalypse.

In November 2004 the SCC issued a unanimous decision written by B. McLaughlin. Actually, it must have been written by a clerk because it contained errors. Among other things, it suggested that Lovaas’ work was in Texas. However, it was in fact at UCLA….since when is Los Angeles in Texas. That’s just one example which gave many in the autism community the impression that the decision was made before the hearing and that the evidence was not even read or considered. The decision was that anything that involved the spending of public money was entirely up to the legislatures. Thus, one may wonder…what for a Charter that bans discrimination and a court system to challenge governments?

However, to add insult to injury, about a year later I saw an article in a newspaper indicating that the Chief Justice had gone to Australia and given a speech to law students at Monash University. What did she say in her speech? It included a discussion of the need for courts and judges to stand up to governments and not take instructions or directions from them but to stick to their jobs of interpreting and applying the law.

My jaw dropped as I read the article summarizing her speech. “What a hypocrite!” I thought.

While many people across Canada may salute her departure from the bench with fondness and sadness, I have been waiting for this long overdue day for a long time. She’s finally gone. I wish it she would have left a long time ago, but better late than never.

So please ask her about this and whether she ever considered herself to be inconsistent and had difficulty taking her own advice.

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

An interesting exchange in the House of Commons yesterday regarding Health Accords, Medicare and ABA for autism! Eight seconds that got to the point for a change!  Too bad the response from the federal Minister of Health was…the usual ostrich head in sand phenomenon.  As least she did not try to dismiss the question by quoting her Cabinet colleague Minister for Persons with Disabilities by making a reference to “sob stories” or something.

Is the Ostrich replication strategy really the best we can expect from the Minister? Are some petitpas (small steps) truly too much to expect from her on this file before the next election?

With an answer like the one she gave, which betrays absolutely no interesting in doing anything on the issue, what impact can we say that the recent Senate “autism awareness month” activities, and subsequent letter to the PM, had on the Minister of Health?  Evidently, not much.

And with an answer like that, what chance does the Liberal Party “working group” on the autism treatment in Medicare resolution have to influence the Minister to take any “grandpas” (big steps)?  Hmm…..

House of Commons, December 6, 2017

<b>Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP): </b>

Mr. Speaker, it is tricky to do this, but I cannot ask my question until I express what I think is in all of our hearts. Best wishes to the Minister of Fisheries as he faces his new health challenges.

In my remaining eight seconds, will the Minister of Health consider working with the health accords with the provinces to pursue all medically necessary autism spectrum disorder treatments, including applied behaviour analysis, as part of a medicare approved treatment?

<b>Hon. Ginette Petitpas Taylor (Minister of Health, Lib.): </b>

Mr. Speaker, we recognize that autism spectrum disorder has a significant and lifelong impact on individuals and their families. Federal investments in research, data improvement, surveillance, and training skills are supporting those with autism and their families.

There are extraordinary stakeholders across the country raising awareness and providing services to families. Our government will certainly continue to provide support for them and for their efforts.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Public Service Announcement regarding the Disability Tax Credit…

If the Ministry of National Extortion and Shakedowns, oops, I mean the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) is causing you grief with respect to claiming and/or maintaining the Disability Tax Credit, then Autism Canada would like to hear from you!  They are seeking the stories about your experiences with the CRA on this issue.  Here is some info on their Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/<wbr />autismcanada/photos/a.<wbr />468163920804.244318.<wbr />52013555804/10155334501765805/<wbr />?type=3&theater

Last week Autism Canada had some meetings in Ottawa and held a press conference which generated some media buzz (see links below), however, their file is still open in this matter and they want to hear from families who are experiencing problems.

Media hits:

Global (national, Toronto and Kingston – possibly more):

https://globalnews.ca/news/3889160/cra-disability-tax-credit-autism/

CTV:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/autism-group-calls-on-cra-to-make-applying-for-disability-tax-credit-easier-1.3701665

iPolitics:

https://ipolitics.ca/2017/11/29/autistic-canadians-struggling-access-tax-credit-says-activist/

iPolitics:

https://ipolitics.ca/2017/11/30/ipolitics-scheer-gun-control-disability-tax-credit-secret-ballot-vote-lead-hill-agenda/

CBC:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/canada-revenue-agency-battle-pei-mom-daughter-autism-souris-1.4427991

Ottawa Life magazine:

http://www.ottawalife.com/article/autism-canada-calls-for-greater-equity-and-transparency-in-disability-tax-credit-procedures?c=39

CPAC:

http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/headline-politics/episodes/55986998

CTV:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=1268832&playlistId=1.3702488&binId=1.810415&playlistPageNum=1&binPageNum=1&cid=sm:nationalvideo:facebook:post:11302017:autism

CBC the Current:

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-monday-december-4-2017-1.4428749/canada-revenue-agency-needs-to-be-more-consistent-with-disability-tax-credits-say-advocates-1.4428891

CBC PEI:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/canada-revenue-agency-battle-pei-mom-daughter-autism-souris-1.4427991

CTV:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/5things/5-things-to-know-on-friday-dec-1-2017-1.3702549

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Just when you think you’ve heard it all….

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/thalidomide-survivors-hehr-allegations-1.4433539

Yup, that’s right….the Federal Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities Kent Hehr, who is a quadriplegic, had a meeting with some Thalidomide survivors and made some rather stunning comments, such as: “everybody has a sob story”, and that their problems are not as difficult in their adult years as they were in their youth.  The thing about life expectancy and the benefits to the government is disputed, so I guess the other comments are acknowledged.

The tragedy here is that the Minister for Persons with Disabilities seems to consider every disabled person’s story “a sob story”.  No wonder the federal government has not used the words “National” – “Autism” – “Strategy” consecutively in one sentence since Trudeau was elected.  It is just another sob story unworthy of serious attention perhaps?  I remember when I was protesting on the Hill many years ago getting a very offensive email from a person in Winnipeg who was at the far end of the “Libertarian” political spectrum.  He suggested in the most blunt terms that Medicare should exist and that everybody should be responsible for their own healthcare and he hoped that my campaign would cease with my drowning in the Ottawa river.  A real sweetheart him. Anyways, the comments of this “Minister” are rather insulting to every person with a disability (or should I say “with a sob story”) and anyone who cares about those with disabilities. They are also worrisome.  It would be nice to think that the Minister might actually care about his mandate and have some respect for his Department’s “clients”… but evidently in this case there seems to be a problem.  Justin….time for a Cabinet shuffle!

I hope someone founds “The National Sob Story Party for the Advancement of Disability Rights” and runs a candidate in the guy’s riding and brings lots  and lots of boxes of Kleenex to the all candidates debates meetings, etc.

 

 

[Author]

Replies