Tagged: discrimination
Media call averts stealth cuts to medical benefits for Nova Scotians with disabilities
The Nova Scotia Department of Community Services (DCS) backed off a clandestine plan to cut medical services for disabled Nova Scotians living in special care homes late Friday Thursday afternoon, hours before it was to take effect.
The province had planned to implement the unannounced cuts over the Canada Day long weekend, but shelved the plan hours after the Canadian Press News Agency sought comment from DCS Minister Denise Peterson-Rafuse. Operators of special care homes were told the policy was “on hold” in late afternoon emails from frontline care coordinators.
The policy would have curtailed coverage for a wide range of medical benefits including dental care, drugs, and medical supplies.
In one case, workers caring for an elderly diabetic who receives a living allowance of just $125 per month were told his daily insulin injections would no longer be covered, because the type of insulin prescribed for his hard-to-control blood-sugar levels is not on a list of approved drugs. The man, who has a developmental handicap, leads an active life and is beloved by his community.
Another agency was told the province would no longer pay for an anti-seizure medication required by one of its residents.
The new policy would have required pre-approval for most items, including annual dental cleanings. It was developed without consultation with caregivers, operators of special needs homes, or the disabled residents themselves. Frontline DCS workers were still receiving training in the new restrictions as late as yesterday.
Governments often choose to announce controversial measures as holiday weekends are getting underway. In this case, the department didn’t announced the planned cuts at all, although it did find time Wednesday to issue a news release trumpeting increased payments to welfare recipients, also set to take place July 1.
Tipped to the new policy by a mainland organization that operates several special care homes, Canadian Press sought comment from Peterson-Rafuse. She was unavailable, as were all of her key officials. Notoriously sensitive to bad publicity, the Dexter Government closely monitors media requests, with responses tightly controlled from the premier’s office.
The CP inquiry apparently set off alarm bells. At 3:54 p.m., Friday Thursday, a DCS official emailed a dozen operators of special care homes in Cape Breton a one-line email: “Sorry. We just got an email saying that this is now on hold. Continue as we have been.”
DCS coordinators had earlier been told not to let operators of special needs homes see copies of the seven highly technical documents that spell out the new policy. Contrarian obtained copies this evening, and we have posted them to our website:
- Special Needs Policy (27 pp.)
- Financial Needs Policy (17 pp.)
- Appendix A: DCS Basic & Special Needs Rates (9 pp.)
- Appendix B: Funding Source Guide (2 pp.)
- Appendix C: Dental Rate Guidelines (9 pp.)
- Special Diet Rate Guidelines (2 pp.)
- DCS Glossary of Terms (16 pp.)
Wheelchairs unbound
Haligonian Warren Reed objects to the thoughtlessly patronizing word choices many journalists apply to wheelchair-users and those who discriminate them.
In an email to two Chronicle-Herald reporters who recently wrote about separate cases of discrimination by Metro Transit and the Nova Scotia Justice Department against wheelchair users, he complained about three sentences in their stories:
- “The driver even called his supervisor, who confirmed that wheelchair-bound passengers are not allowed on [Bus No.] 60.”
- “However, Sunday morning the driver said that he could get in a lot of trouble for letting wheelchair-bound passengers onto non-wheelchair routes.”
- “Amy Paradis, 16, is quadriplegic and confined to a wheelchair.”
Reed wrote:
Evidently, the style manual in use at the Chronicle Herald requires the modification of wheelchair either with “confined” or “bound.” This must be in the chapter on Gratuitous 19th Century Misconceptions.
Bob Sheeny’s wheelchair doesn’t seem to restrain him in any way; What prevents him from visiting his friend is not his disability, but the intransigence of Metro Transit. Without the discriminatory foot-dragging of Metro Transit, Mr. Sheeny would be able to get on any bus in HRM – just as he could in London or New York. It’s not that Mr. Sheeny can’t do things; he’s prevented from doing them.
You should train yourself to use the much more accurate phrase “wheelchair user.” Wheelchairs are enabling and liberating.
- Wheelchair users are not allowed on the No. 60 bus.
- He could get in a lot of trouble for letting wheelchair users onto non-wheelchair routes.
- Amy Paradis, 16 uses a wheelchair.
Those sentences are not judgmental, and they help clarify the absurdity of the situation. Let me see. Bus drivers can get in trouble for letting passengers on their buses? The important thing about Amy is that she uses a wheelchair, not her medical condition. If you gave a medical opinion every time you mentioned Darrell Dexter or Stephen Harper, you’d be spending most of your time in court.
I recommend substituting these catch-phrases, which are highly accurate:
- Discriminatory Metro Transit
- Cliche-ridden Chronicle Herald
- Proudly backward Halifax officials
- Patronizing Chronicle Herald reporters
- Poorly served Chronicle Herald readers
When you see Bob Sheeny, don’t feel sorry for him, just get out of his way.
I’m uncomfortable singling out the Herald here, because I’m sure I’ve used the same stupid phrases without thinking. I bet the reporters in question slapped their heads in dismayed recognition when they read Reed’s sharp letter.
Still, in 2010, there’s no excuse for a newspaper copy desk not having clear and enforced policies on such word choices — as, hopefully, the Herald does now.
Docking fees
Docking fee: $150 if you’re from around here; $250 if you’re not.
So the summer residents who return year after year — buying goods in our stores, attending our concerts, paying property taxes for services they don’t use, spreading the word about Cape Breton to folks back home — let’s stick them for an extra 67%. Wouldn’t want them to think we’re neighbourly, or appreciative of their commitment to Cape Breton, now would we?
Mean-spirited. Dumb.
