[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,

OK, so we’re in the final stretch of this federal election.  Where do we stand and how does this compare to what is happening now in the U.S.?

In Canada, we have two federal parties (NDP and Conservatives) who pledge to consult to develop a National Autism Strategy which we may see either at some indeterminate point in the future or in five years (after the next federal election – or more if there are minority governments). Neither the Liberals nor the Greens mention the word “autism” in their platforms, although CASDA appears to insist that the Greens made a commitment.

Isn’t it interesting on that October 1, 2019 two things were reported in the U.S. which really put Canada to shame on the autism file.

First, President Trump signed into law an autism bill that now allocates US$1.8 billion (that’s CDN$2.4 billion) over five years to autism research, early detection and treatment.  The Bill is known as the Autism Collaboration, Accountability, Research, Education and Support Act (CARES).

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/trump-signs-18-billion-autism-cares-act/story?id=66002425

Second, the website “disabilityscoop.com”, the self-proclaimed premier source for developmental disability news, reported in an article titled: “Autism Insurance Coverage Now Required in All 50 States” that:

https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2019/10/01/autism-insurance-coverage-now-required-50-states/27223/

“After officials in the last holdout state enacted a new rule, all 50 states and Washington, D.C. have mandates that require some level of insurance coverage for the treatment of autism.  The Tennessee Department of Commerce and Insurance now requires all individual, small and large group insurance plans issued in the state to cover treatment for autism that is “medically necessary and appropriate and is not experimental,” including applied behavior analysis, or ABA, at the same level as any other medical condition…”

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, here it is. The Conservative Party issued a news release about their “National Autism Strategy” (NAS) commitment. It is available here:

https://www.conservative.ca/canadas-conservatives-release-statement-national-autism-strategy/

And Mike Lake with his son issued a video of them together as Mike Lakes reads a variation of it.

Wow. He was first elected in 2006.  Thirteen years later….I think this is the first time I have heard him speak about a NAS and make some sort of “commitment”.

So what have we got?  First, a recognition of some problems, e.g., that there are a lot of people affected by ASD and “evidence-based therapies and services” cost a lot.  OK, so there is no reference specifically to ABA, but the reference to $80,000 is something most parents who are trying to implement ABA programs for their kids can identify with.

It is great to see the words stating that “Canada’s Conservatives believe that the federal government can play an important role in developing a strategy to assist those living with autism and their families” because up to now it has been hard to figure out what, if any, role the Conservatives thought the federal government could play (besides the 2007 creation of an autism webpage, etc.). Certainly with respect to the issue of access to ABA treatment under Medicare Mike Lake made it very clear in his 2007 Media Statement that he did not think the feds had any role to play in that matter.

So what is the commitment?  It appears to be to”work with autism stakeholders to develop” a NAS.  So it is not a NAS.  There is no specific action plan besides consultations. There are no specifics about using the resources or authority of the government to do anything that will directly affect people with autism.

To their credit, they actually mention consulting with other levels of government, including the provinces.

And how much will it cost to develop this strategy? $50 million over five years. $10 million a year.

Realistically, what does that involve?  Well, a Branch of either the federal Ministry of Health or the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) may be tasked with setting up a unit to be responsible for developing the NAS over five years. They will be given the corresponding budget.  A number of “full-time equivalents” (FTEs) will be assigned to the file (the usual bureaucratic staff complement of a secretary, a team of junior officers, regular officers, senior officers, and at least one executive Director (possibly two) and the part-time attention of at least one Director-General.  Thus, the human resource costs alone will be at least $500,000, and quite possibly (much) more.  Then there will be expenses relating to all the consultations with all the stakeholders.  Significant amounts of travel will probably be involved, not only by the federal bureaucrats but also by the stakeholders (e.g., to attend meetings).

So if I get this correctly, in five years, and after spending $50 million, the government will have a NAS blueprint.  The problem is that developing and finalizing a statement about what the government has decided to include in a NAS is quite different from implementing a NAS.  And that’s why  the news release refers to the announcement itself as “an important first step”.

But first step toward what?  Is there any hint that suggests what the final NAS will look like?  Well, some initial criteria are suggested: “The National Autism Strategy will be person-centred, include first-person perspectives, will be culturally appropriate, and will reflect the needs of Canada’s northern, rural, and remote communities.” What does that mean?  Does “person-centred” mean that there will be easier access to treatment?

To me, it looks like kicking the can down the road. It the next election is in four years, the final outcome of this commitment and the making public of the strategy is going to be after the next election.  So in other words, this commitment is a loose strategy to develop a strategy, but that strategy at the end of the day could potentially be nothing more than a tax credit (which could have been announced today).

Is that the best that the Conservatives could do? Somehow, the proposal seems familiar.  A few years ago the Conservative government funded a “working group” to develop a business proposal for a “Canadian Autism Partnership”.  Their business plan report was given to the Liberal government in 2017. It began with “the people have spoken”. Indeed, the business plan stated that they met with over 100 provincial and territorial government officials from 13 jurisdictions. They held community round tables with over 500 people. And they received survey input from 5,000 Canadians.  How much was spent on the consultations? How was that money spent?  Regardless, now the new proposal is to spend even more, and to do it all again.

How much repetition of consultation is necessary?  We’ve been telling the government what we need since the Auton case started 20 years ago.  Is it really too much to expect that after 20 years of communicating our needs and wants to the government that they would indicate what they are concretely prepared to do as part of an action plan?

Just yesterday (Sunday, October 6), the Conservatives issued a news release with promises for the fisheries. The news release contains seven distinct steps set out in bold.

https://www.conservative.ca/canadas-conservatives-announce-plan-to-support-fisheries/

Why is it that when it comes to autism federal politicians won’t get specific?

 

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

So we’re in the final stretch and at this point in time it appears that we’ve gotten the signals from three parties and are only waiting to hear from the Conservatives.

However, after the Liberal election platform was released that did not contain the word “autism” in it, it appears that a bunch of autism organizations (e.g. Autism Ontario, Autism Nova Scotia, etc.) quickly put pen to paper and sent a letter dated October 4, 2019, to Trudeau asking him about a National Autism Strategy.  However, the wording is interesting. As with the CASDA blueprint for a NAS, it mentions “supports”. The letters contains no reference to access to treatment or Medicare discrimination, etc.  Instead, they mention that the provinces are struggling to meet the needs of the autism community across the lifespan and as a result there are inequities and people are moving from one province to another. And their question to the PM is:

“what is your party’s commitment to working with provincial and territorial autism organizations and stakeholders on a National Autism Strategy?”

Why won’t they mention the provincial and territorial governments?  What kind of a national strategy for autism can one expect without participation of the provinces?  Or do they now consider provinces to be “stakeholders”?  My reading of the buzzwords is that “stakeholders” was not written here with the intent of including provincial governments. If the authors meant to include provincial and territorial governments they would have mentioned them separately.  This should not come as a surprise since the CASDA blueprint for a NAS documents on the CASDA website specifically say that it is not intended to change provincial government policies.

The kind of NAS that CASDA and these organizations is not the kind that I would prefer to see.  I don’t understand why these organizations don’t look at the Liberal government’s record on the creation of their National Dementia Strategy where they passed a law that required the federal Minister of Health to work with his provincial counterparts.  Bill C-233 received Royal Assent in June 2017 and includes the following passages:

“The Minister or delegated officials, in cooperation with representatives of the provincial and territorial governments responsible for public health, must develop and implement a comprehensive national strategy to address all aspects of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia that includes, among other things,…”

“The Minister must, within 180 days after the day on which this Act comes into force, convene a conference with representatives of the provincial and territorial governments responsible for public health, basic and clinical researchers, family caregivers, health care professionals and other care providers, people suffering from dementia as well as representatives from the lay advocacy sector, the Alzheimer Society of Canada, other Alzheimer advocacy groups, and other dementia advocacy groups, for the purpose of developing the national strategy referred to in subsection (1).”

Why do these autism organizations not think that the federal government should adopt a similar collaborative approach that includes the provincial governments?

It will be interesting to see if the Conservatives come out with something meaningful before the election.  And after the election it will be interesting to see if the leadership of these autism organizations can assess the past 20 years of failed lobbying and try to figure out some “lessons learned” and disseminate some messages to our community on what works and what does not, and why.

In the meantime, a fellow parent in Toronto and I are are sufficiently fed up with all the beating around the bush and not saying what needs to be said that we are planning to hold a press conference on Parliament Hill on Friday, October 11 at 10:30 a.m. followed by a rally on the Hill at 12 noon.  If you know anyone in and around Ottawa who might be able to join us, please tell them about it and ask them to join us at 12 noon!

<u>NATIONAL AUTISM RALLY FOR MEDICARE AND NATIONAL AUTISM STRATEGY</u>

<u>Press Conference:</u>

Where:             Parliament Hill, Room 135-b – West Block

When:              Friday, October 11, 2019 at 10:30 a.m.

<u>Rally:</u>

When:              Friday, October 11, 2019; From 12 noon to 1:30 p.m.

Where:             Parliament Hill, Ottawa.

Speakers:         Jamie Peddle, Andrew Kavchak and other activists from the autism community.

Members of the autism community will be protesting on Parliament Hill during the Federal election to call on every federal political party to commit to a National Autism Strategy that will have as a core component the taking of steps to ensure that autism treatment is covered by Canada’s public health insurance system (Medicare) in every province and territory.

Although provincial governments across this country have recognized the benefits of autism treatment (Intensive Behaviour Intervention based on principles of Applied Behaviour Analysis) and launched treatment programs, the Ontario Autism Program, and others like it, is administered by the Ministry of Social Services and not Health.  This misplacement of autism treatment programs has significant negative consequences and amounts to discrimination in our Medicare system.

Since coming to power in 2015 the Liberal government passed a law requiring the federal Minister of Health to work with her provincial counterparts to develop a National Dementia Strategy.  The last budget allocated tens of millions of dollars to this effort. What this demonstrates is that where there is the political will, there is a way.

What we expect from our federal government is to convene a meeting with the provinces, demonstrate some leadership, provide necessary incentives, and negotiate the inclusion of autism treatment under Medicare from coast to coast pursuant to national standards.  We are not asking for the moon.  We are only asking to be treated as are all other Canadians under Medicare.

 

 

 

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

So we’re in the middle of a federal election campaign and so far nothing seems to be happening on the autism front.

The NDP issued a platform committing themselves to consultations to develop a National Autism Strategy if elected.  The fact that we’ve been lobbying and repeated what we would like for the past 10-15-20 years apparently has not been clear and does not count. Like a game of snakes and ladders, we hit a snake and have to start from square one again.

The Green party’s platform says nothing about autism.  They want to do a lot on the healthcare front, including renegotiating Health Accords to include rehabilitation services, which strike me as a model for how to get the similar autism treatment services into Medicare. But no mention of autism.

Regarding the Conservatives, on the Ontario television program “The Agenda” over a month ago Mike Lake appeared on a panel discussing autism and suggested that the Conservatives would have something. However, throughout the show he kept dropping names of experts that he knew and seemed to suggest or imply that a Conservative National Autism Strategy would consist of a promise to do a whole lot of consultation with people Mike Lake knows, etc.

So we’re less than a month away from election day.  What is Mike Lake and his party waiting for to declare their autism position?  Well, one thought is that they are waiting for the Ontario Ford government to announce their reform plans to the Ontario Autism Program.  It appears that the “Advisory Panel” that worked all summer on reviewing the consultation input from the community has made some report to the Minister of Social Services.  At least, that’s what I heard.  If true, then the government should be in a position to give some direction soon…..or will they wait until after the federal election?  Would that delay the federal Conservative Party from issuing any promises until after the election? In other words, no promise from them, period.  And if there is no pressure from the Conservatives, then Trudeau probably won’t make any electoral autism promise either.

In light of the fact that so far there is nothing from the Conservatives  and no indication of when something (anything!) may even be issued, it really makes me wonder about CASDA’s approach to dealing with some politicians.  When you get something, it is nice to thank the person. But does it make sense to thank someone for…nothing?  What does it mean when you post a picture on social media of a politician and thank him for “dialogue” (what did he say?) and “leadership” (what did he do?)  in the middle of an election?  Well, CASDA did just that for Mike Lake on September 26 and he promptly “re-tweeted” it.  Does it give the electorate in his riding the impression that the national autism community is grateful to Mike Lake and supports him?  Was this a CASDA endorsement of sorts? If he had staged a press conference with Scheer and made an announcement that the lack of Medicare coverage for autism treatment across the country was a problem and they were going to take steps to address it with the same vigour as the Harper government pursued the “national securities regulator” project (despite the fact that the Supreme Court of Canada said “it’s provincial” and a number of provinces did not want it), then I would understand a mid-election show of support.  But in the absence of…anything…at least, so far…what is the motivation behind such behaviour? What benefits come to the autism community from that? I don’t get it. I just don’t get it.  If the dialogue is so good….why not share transcripts with the community about what was said? Why the secrecy? Why does it seem that so often we have to guess?

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well this is interesting.  CASDA just came out with an “election toolkit” that give people ideas on what they can do in this election (e.g., contact political candidates, etc.).

At the end of the toolkit there is this interesting paragraph:

“Sharing your lived experience
We would love to hear about your experience. If you met election candidates face-to-face or had a conversation on the phone, did you feel the candidates listened to your story? Did they ask good questions? What did they say they would do if elected? Did you enjoy speaking with them? If you emailed or sent a letter to one or more of your candidates, did you receive a response? Are you willing to share it with us? To share your experience meeting with candidates, please email …”

It seems to me that CASDA has never told the autism community about its meeting and communications with politicians. They always talk about Mike Lake being a big supporter, but I can’t find Mike Lake’s comments on the CASDA NAS “blueprint” anywhere. I was hoping Mike Lake would express his views rather than keep them secret.  Obviously CASDA must have shared the blueprint with him and asked for his support. What did he say?  As far as I know, CASDA has not made that public. Nor have they made public what anyone else has said during meetings or in response to meetings.  The Green Party issued their election platform document yesterday and it contains no mention at all of autism. Would it be correct to assume that CASDA’s lobbying of the Green Party was totally ineffective? What did the Green Party say in response to CASDA’s submission? If CASDA won’t inform the autism community of their exchanges with politicians, then we can only guess.

And if CASDA does not want to share such information with the autism community, why do they want the autism community to share such information with them?

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Today the federal Green Party released their election platform.

https://www.greenparty.ca/sites/default/files/platform_2019_en_web_update_09-16.pdf

It is 88 pages long and the word “autism” does not appear once.  At least, I can’t find it. I may be wrong (I hope I am), and if I am please let me know.

I remember seeing a video of Elizabeth May standing up in the House of Commons once and wondering why there was no National Autism Strategy?  She even posted the video on her website (see link below).

http://elizabethmaymp.ca/parliament/2017/05/18/why-was-a-national-autism-strategy-not-in-this-years-budget/

Well now I wonder if she will post a video of her asking herself why her Party is continuing to totally ignore the issue.

The platform addresses many things that are not surprising…most notably, the environment.  But there is also a section dealing with healtcare.  What do they propose to do?  A lot of things, including: expanding the Canada Health Act to create a universal Pharmacare program,  restore the previous Health Accords, and “Negotiate the Canada Health Accord to prioritize expansion of mental health and rehabilitation services, reduction in wait times, access to safe abortion services and access to gender-affirming health services such as hormones, blockers, and surgery”.

Wow. That’s interesting.  In many ways, autism treatment is similar to rehabilitation.  It is not a huge step, and in fact may be a logical progression, to suggest that if people who suffered from a brain injury or something like that and need lots of rehabilitation involving significant repetition of exercises in a progressive order to learn and develop previously lost skills, etc. are entitled to Medicare coverage, and that the federal Green Party wants the federal government to negotiate with the provinces the expansion (on a priority basis!) of such rehabilitation services, that they could and should support doing the same thing for autism treatment.

Anything else?  Yes!  They want to “reorient Health Canada’s mandate” towards things like mental health and addictions, and address the opioid crisis as a “national health emergency”.

They also propose creating two new strategies in the health realm: a “National Mental Health Strategy” and a “Suicide Prevention Strategy”.

But not strategy for autism.  Why?

I suspect the CASDA folks must be really depressed. Their NAS blueprint only called for a few tax credits in the area of “supports”, and the Greens would not even grant them that.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, the federal election has been called and it will be interesting to see if the either the Conservatives or Liberals (or both) issue any campaign promises regarding autism.

CASDA issued a “FAQ” document regarding their NAS “blueprint”. The document is dated September 10, 2019. It contains some interesting questions and answers, including this passage:

https://www.casda.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/FAQ-Blueprint-2019.09.10.pdf

“Does the Blueprint recommend changes to the Canada Health Act?

CASDA recognizes that too many healthcare needs for people with ASD are not covered by
provincial health systems. This is unacceptable and CASDA will continue to support partner
organizations in advocating for expanded provincial healthcare coverage for people with ASD.
Because the Canada Health Act is a broad piece of legislation that does not deal with the needs
of specific conditions such as ASD, the Blueprint does not focus on the Canada Health Act as a
pathway to achieve this change.”

This is an interesting way of presenting a problem and dismissing it.  When it comes to Medicare coverage for ABA autism treatment, the blueprint is silent. The word “Medicare” does not even come up. Here, the question is raised in an indirect manner, without really identifying the issue that is a problem or the alternative means by which it could be resolved. Instead, one avenue for resolution is identified, without making it clear what this proposed solution is supposed to address.

While the issue of the lack of Medicare coverage for ABA autism treatment was not even addressed in the “blueprint”, now the response suggests that the issue is not even worth identifying in isolation because “…too many healthcare needs for people with ASD are not covered by provincial health systems…”  Really? And what would those other unmet “healthcare needs” be?

This type of answer brings back memories of a debate I had with the CASDA leadership in the media after their autism project proposal was made public.  While I focused on the question of public health insurance coverage for ABA autism treatment (which has struck me as a key priority issue since my son was diagnosed 16 years ago), the response from CASDA made reference to a list of other outstanding issues that apparently were of equal priority to them, including as dental care, community safety, etc.  Why does CASDA have such a hard time with the “Medicare for Autism Now” issue that they are not even able to identify it and feel repeatedly compelled to swamp and marginalize it?

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

This afternoon a parent of child with autism in Ottawa forwarded to me an email that they just received from the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO).  You have to read it to believe it. I forwarded it to a number of autism advocates with the message below…

 
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Dear Friend in the Autism Community and those who “Care about Medicare”!</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Please see below an email that was sent out by the Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario (CHEO) to parents who have kids with autism.</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>This email provides a link to autism treatment services provided by a hospital, with a price list.  This is not how Medicare is supposed to work.  We should be able to use our “Health Cards” and not credit cards to access medically-necessary autism treatment.</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>But in Ontario, and many other provinces, this is the norm and no one in the autism community’s leadership seems to notice or speak about it or even think it is an issue.</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Can you imagine parents of any other illness, disorder, disease, condition, or syndrome getting an email like this and saying “This is OK and fine with me and the whole community?”</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Notice that it is not the Department of Health that administers the Ontario Autism Program but the Ministry of Social Services, which the CHEO message refers to as “the government”.  The Ministry of Social Services contracts out the provision of the treatment services to regional service providers. In Eastern Ontario, it is CHEO who provides the ABA autism treatment. Yet, just two weeks ago, the federal Minister of Health tabled a federal government response to a petition calling for the inclusion of autism treatment in Medicare by stating that Medicare only applies to medical services provided by hospitals and doctors.  She claimed autism treatment is provided by neither.  What a falsehood!  If the Minister wanted to check the truth and facts in the real world, she should take her chauffeur-driven limousine for a 15 minute ride to CHEO and see for herself how what she said is not true.</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Notice that the messages says that “<u>In all other parts of CHEO today, we deliver services based on clinical need and greatest urgency but this is not how the government has set-up the Ontario Autism Program now or in the past.”</u></p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Why is it that CASDA and other autism organizations, most notably the “Autism Societies”, and people described as “tireless autism advocates” like Mike Lake, don’t talk about this issue of the lack of Medicare coverage for ABA autism treatment? Why is it that the CASDA National Autism Strategy “blueprint” does not say a word about the lack of Medicare coverage for autism treatment? Instead, their blueprints proposes expanded tax credits.</p>
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Fixing this grotesque example of discrimination in Medicare must be a core pillar and foundation of any National Autism Strategy that any party proposes during this election.  The NDP completely missed the mark in their election platform as the section on “Medicare” completely omits any reference to autism (the disability section refers to consultations for an autism strategy).  What will the Liberals and the Conservatives propose, if anything?  Any bets?  More consultations?</p>
After its election in 2015 the Liberal government passed a Bill requiring the federal Minister of Health to work with her provincial counterparts to develop a National Dementia Strategy that would help improve the lives of Canadians with dementia.  In the last federal budget the government allocated tens of millions of dollars to implement the still non-existent strategy.  What this demonstrates is that where there is the political will, there is a way.  Where is the political will to help Canadians with autism?

What we expect from our federal government is to convene a meeting with the provinces, demonstrate some leadership, provide necessary incentives, and negotiate the inclusion of autism treatment under Medicare from coast to coast pursuant to national standards.  We are not asking for the moon.  We are only asking to be treated as are all other Canadians under Medicare.
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Is this situation acceptable?  Not to me it isn’t.  If you share my sentiments on this matter, please join me and my friends on Parliament Hill during the election campaign for a “Medicare for Autism Now!” rally.  Details about the time and date to follow.  Stay tuned.</p>
 
<p style=”font-weight: 400;”>Begin forwarded message:</p>

———- Forwarded message ———
From: <strong class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564gmail_sendername”>Autismemail <autismemail@cheo.on.ca>
Date: Wed, Sep 11, 2019 at 4:14 PM
Subject: ::: CHEO Autism Program fall service offerings/ Offres de services d’automne du programme d’autisme du CHEO
To: Autismemail <autismemail@cheo.on.ca>

Dear families,

<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>The government will launch its new Ontario Autism Program by April 2020.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>Until then, there are two streams of service under the current Ontario Autism Program. If you are currently in-service with us under the 2018-19 program, the government has decided that your plans will be extended. Please contact us to learn more.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>For those who were still on the Ontario Autism Program waitlist as of April 1, 2019, the Ministry of Children, Community and Social Services has also started to issue cheques (known as Childhood Budgets).<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>CHEO does not manage the autism waitlist, the government does. We also don’t manage the Childhood Budgets; the government decides who comes off the waitlist and who gets a cheque.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>You can choose to buy autism fall services packages from CHEO when you receive your Childhood Budget. If you have questions about this, please call us.</p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>Our team of autism experts listened to families to develop these fall services packages. We’ve incorporated feedback from families currently in-service and from those who attended our family night events.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>One thing we know for sure is that families want high-quality, effective services. By bundling different types of services together, CHEO is able to lower the costs to families in order to maximize Childhood Budgets.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>In all other parts of CHEO today, we deliver services based on clinical need and greatest urgency but this is not how the government has set-up the Ontario Autism Program now or in the past. We are still learning how to operate in a fee-for-service system and we are doing our best to minimize negative impacts on families. We know this is a difficult time for many of you.<u></u><u></u></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>Once the government decides how the Ontario Autism Program will operate after April 1, 2020, we will determine what services we can offer long-term.  We remain committed to involving families and the community at-large in that decision once we learn more about the government’s new plan. <u></u><u></u></p>

<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”>Please contact us if you have questions at all. We know this is a stressful time for families and we are here to help you.

– <i>CHEO Autism Program<u></u><u></u></i></p>
<p class=”m_-3900821711588292597m_-2920705322902432123m_-7412787321872654548m_1948377358825677682m_-7677557056283150981yiv5766830564MsoNormal”><u></u> </p>

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, it appears that yesterday the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued a decision stating that 54,000 Aboriginal children could be eligible for compensation because “…the federal government willfully and recklessly discriminated against Indigenous children living on reserve by failing to provide funding for child and family services.”

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-canadian-human-rights-tribunal-orders-ottawa-to-compensate-first/

The article states: “Canada must provide compensation of up to $40,000 to First Nations children who were unnecessarily taken into care on or after Jan. 1, 2006, the tribunal said, adding its orders also cover parents or grandparents and children denied essential services.”

The news reports on the radio that I’ve heard include interviews with people involved in the case that suggest that the federal government was pretty mean. They knew they were discriminating and they kept doing it.  So now Canadian taxpayers are on the hook, again, for some astronomical sum.  Hopefully that will help resolve the issue and promote reconciliation, etc.

However, this really sounds like a template precedent.  Does the provincial government (and the federal one) not owe any corresponding duty of care to provide basic core medically necessary healthcare services to all Canadian children under Medicare?  If a class of these children are left out, are they, and their parents and grandparents not entitled to compensation?  Is the autism community not such a class or group of Canadians who have been discriminated against under Medicare?

Getting back to the actual case though, if the PM is going to issue an apology, what I would like to know is whether every federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs since 2006 and their Deputy Ministers will also issue some sort of explanation and apology not only to the Aboriginal victims of their discriminatory actions, but to all Canadians for their mishandling of their portfolios and putting us in more debt as a result of their actions?

 

 

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Here is a website with a petition campaign that seems relevant!

https://itsmedicallynecessary.ca/

[Author]

Replies