TRANSCRIPT
FAMILY AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE
Inquiry into social inclusion and Victorians with a disability
Melbourne — 6 March 2014
Members
Mrs A. Coote
Ms B. Halfpenny
Mr J. Madden
Mr D. O’Brien
Ms D. Ryall
Chair: Ms D. Ryall
Deputy Chair: Ms B. Halfpenny
Staff
Executive Officer: Dr J. Bush
Research Officer: Ms V. Finn
Administrative Officer: Ms N. Tyler
Witnesses
Ms K. Howe, executive director,
Ms J. Hargrave, policy officer, violence against women with disabilities, and
Ms J. Oldfield, partnership and leadership development officer, Women with Disabilities Victoria.
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
1
The CHAIR — Welcome, and thank you for your time and for appearing before the committee today for its
inquiry into the social inclusion and Victorians with a disability. As outlined in the guide that has been provided
to you, all evidence taken by the committee is protected under the provisions of the Parliamentary Committees
Act 2003 and other relevant legislation, and that attracts parliamentary privilege. Any comments you make
outside this hearing do not attract parliamentary privilege. We are recording proceedings, but they will not be
publicly broadcast. You will be sent a proof copy of the transcript, and you can correct any factual or
grammatical errors that may be in it. I ask you to introduce yourselves, indicating your roles, and provide us
with a 15-minute presentation, and then we will respond with questions.
Ms HOWE — Great. Thank you, Dee, and thank you very much for the opportunity to present. We are
delighted to be here today and to speak to you about our particular concerns, which of course are around the
issues for women with disabilities. My name is Keran Howe, and I am the executive director of Women with
Disabilities Victoria. We also have here Jane Oldfield, who is our partnership and leadership development
officer, and Jen Hargrave, who is a policy officer on violence against women with disabilities. We will each be
speaking this afternoon. We will try to keep it to 5 minutes each, and we would be really pleased to have a
discussion and to answer questions.
We think it is really important to be here today on a couple of counts. It is important for you to hear about the
particular issues of women with disabilities, and we are very pleased that, as people with disabilities, we are
speaking to you today, because I know that often others speak on behalf of people with disabilities, and that is a
very critical concern with regard to being socially excluded. Whilst family or disability organisations have very
valid positions to put, we think the authentic voice of people with disabilities is critical to this inquiry. Talking
about social exclusion today I referred to Wikipedia, which seems to be the latest version of the dictionary:
Social exclusion refers to processes in which individuals or entire communities of people are systematically blocked from rights,
opportunities and resources (e.g. housing, employment, health care, civic engagement, democratic participation and due process),
that are normally available to members of society and which are key to social integration.
I thought Wikipedia had it absolutely right when we talk about people with disabilities, and women with
disabilities in particular, although that definition obviously relates to social exclusion generally.
We know that people with disabilities are deeply and systematically excluded from the most basic access to the
community. If I draw on my experiences as a person with a disability, I currently choose my doctor, dentist,
accountant, where I shop for my clothes, what cafes I go to, what entertainment I choose and where I buy my
lunch all based on not what the quality of the service is or what I like about it but whether or not I can get into
the building. That is just an example from a person with a physical disability. All of us with our diverse and
different impairments find those sorts of characteristic exclusions based on our disabilities or our impairments. I
think we have a very long way to go in terms of how included people with disabilities are in the community.
Our purpose today is to highlight the particular issues that must be considered in addressing social exclusion for
women with disabilities and the way that we might be involved in the community. We want to talk about
violence against women with disabilities as a key factor that influences our inclusion or exclusion from
community life, we want to highlight the importance of specialist programs as opportunities for women to be
encouraged to be included in local community and we want to talk about our leadership program as a good
example of that, because whilst we are emphatically in support of mainstreaming all services for people with
disabilities we now recognise that we do need some specialist support to bridge gaps in order to facilitate that
inclusion in community life. We also want to draw attention to the implications of the NDIS and the importance
of the NDIS in future policy considerations, and our particular emphasis is on making sure that the NDIS has a
gendered approach.
I know that in the submission that we put in you have some information about Women with Disabilities
Victoria. Our interests are particularly representing women with disabilities in Victoria. We are a board, and our
members are all women with disabilities. Most of our staff are women with disabilities, so we think we are
pretty well positioned to speak on behalf of women with disabilities. We focus on the areas that are often
neglected by other advocacy organisations. They are the issues that are particular for women: violence against
women with disabilities; access to health services, particularly sexual and reproductive health; and “gendering”
services- We are focused on gendering the national disability insurance scheme — it is such a key reform in the
disability sector. And we have a secondary focus on mainstream services and women’s access to mainstream
services.
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
2
The work that we do is around empowerment of women with disabilities, research that informs our advocacy,
providing policy advice, representing women on high-level committees and boards and providing advice to
services. The other area that we are starting to develop further is workforce development, so influencing the
way services are provided through providing training. That is the way in which we see that we can most
effectively work for women in Victoria. Our submission very much focuses on the way that gender compounds
the impact of disability on the capacity for people to be involved in community life and the way those other
characteristics such as race, ethnicity, whether or not you live in a rural community, what your sexual
preference might be, age — all of those factors — have an impact on marginalisation and social exclusion. In
our work we think from that intersectional perspective, because it is not as if it is just double. Whenever you add
one of those characteristics that is a disadvantage we find that the marginalisation is really compounded — it is
more than just doubled — and research shows that to be the case.
I think we kept our recommendations very high level. We saw that they aligned with the disability state plan.
What we wanted to emphasise is really that government has a leadership role. It is critical for the Victorian
government, as well as local and national governments, to take leadership in making sure that all portfolio areas
are responsive to both disability and gender. We have talked about the importance of involving women with
disabilities, workforce development across all areas, the importance of disaggregated data, understanding the
nature of disability, understanding whether in fact it is men or women we are talking about, mainstream services
developing disability action plans as well as resourcing specialist services that address gaps in the mainstream
and the importance of advocacy.
I do not think we are just being completely self-interested when we say that advocacy is really critical,
particularly in facilitating those relationships between mainstream services and people with disabilities and
addressing the discrimination that people experience in accessing services. As I have said, I think it is important
that the NDIA has a clear understanding of the gender implications of working with women and those particular
areas that we have identified as priorities that may not necessarily be being considered by the National
Disability Insurance Agency. We are very keen that this inquiry take cognisance of the need to integrate state
services with national services, as we are going to be seeing with the national disability insurance scheme.
We are very happy to discuss our submission and recommendations in further detail, but I would like to hand
over now to Jen to talk a bit more about violence against women with disabilities.
Ms HARGRAVE — Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you. I am pleased to be here, both to speak as
a woman with a disability and to speak about my work, which is in a policy officer role in violence against
women with disabilities. Violence against women is prevalent in our community. VicHealth found that violence
is the leading contributor to death, disability and illness for Australian women aged 15 to 44. Violence is a cause
of social exclusion for its victims. If we do not address violence, then we leave women completely socially
isolated. In comparison to women without disabilities, women with disabilities experience violence at a higher
rate. The violence is experienced for longer periods, from more perpetrators and in more severe episodes.
Women with Disabilities Victoria is currently undertaking a research project called Voices Against Violence in
conjunction with the Office of the Public Advocate and the Domestic Violence Resource Centre Victoria.
Through that research, OPA did a file audit and got evidence of the high rates of violence experienced by
women, the high rates of isolation they experienced and also the way financial abuse is used as a large means of
control against women. The findings of that research are going to be released in May this year, and they will
contain recommendations for government.
Family violence is commonly described as a form of terrorism in the home. Men who choose to use violence
against women use isolation as a strategy to control their victims. This control desolates women’s confidence. In
2003 the World Health Organisation wrote about the powerful effects of lack of control in the home, which
results in low self-esteem, anxiety, social isolation, poor health outcomes and premature death. WHO
recognised that people who are lower in the social hierarchy more commonly experience these forms of control.
This year the Australian Human Rights Commission reported that many people with disabilities are left without
protection and at risk of ongoing violence, so effective strategies are needed to address violence against women
with disabilities.
We are fortunate that we can identify several strategies which are effective in addressing violence against
women with disabilities, and I would like to share three examples with you today. Firstly, applicant support
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
3
workers are social workers located in Victoria’s family violence specialist courts. They support victims to go
through the court process and seek intervention orders. I have seen ASWs assist victims to complete forms,
explain court processes and problem-solve ways to navigate inaccessible court buildings.
An example of the linking work that ASWs can do is the applicant support worker at Sunshine Magistrates
Court who found that the client with a disability was not linked to any disability services and was extremely
isolated. The isolation increased the impact of the family violence she was experiencing. The ASW was able to
contact the local metro access officer, who was able to link her to a local women’s group and to volunteer
opportunities. ASWs have been seen to improve court access and women’s safety, and both the Victorian
Coroner and the Federation of Community Legal Centres have recommended that all courts across Victoria be
resourced with applicant support workers.
Secondly, Making Rights Reality is a two-year project in Melbourne’s south-east designed to improve access to
justice for people who have been sexually assaulted and have a cognitive impairment or a communication
difficulty. By enhancing existing services at the South Eastern Centre against Sexual Assault and the Springvale
Monash Legal Service they were able to reduce barriers to justice. The project evaluation found that building
skills and trust between services increased their cross-referral and increased their capacity to provide an
appropriate service for victims with disabilities. This increased the number of victims coming forward and
meant that crimes that would have otherwise remained invisible came to light, and victims now had a path back
to recovery and social inclusion.
This project is an example of the substantial benefits of intersectoral collaboration. Collaboration between the
sectors is important, not just at a service level but also at a policy and planning level systemically. The work that
we have seen in linking the disability state plan with the violence against women and children action plan has
been a really important example of that, and that type of work really is important to continue.
Lastly, the Victorian government’s Disability and Family Violence Crisis Response Initiative aims to assist
women and children with a disability who require immediate disability support to access a family violence crisis
response. Supports can include attendant care, equipment hire and transport for up to 12 weeks while women
seek longer term arrangements. The following is an example of what the initiative can provide.
Tanya has an acquired brain injury, a back injury and a vision impairment. She lived in a country town where
she was familiar with her environment and got by without disability supports, but this changed when Tanya had
to move to escape an extremely violent partner. In a new unfamiliar environment she now required support. The
initiative funded an outreach worker to provide orientation and support her back to independence and social
inclusion. With the rollout of the NDIS we are concerned that the disability services initiative is adequately
supported and resourced into the future. There is also work we are undertaking with the National Disability
Insurance Agency, which Keran might like to speak about in a moment.
I would like to hand over to Jane.
Ms OLDFIELD — Hi, everyone. Thanks for the opportunity to talk to you today. I am Jane, the partnership
and leadership development officer for Women with Disabilities Victoria, and my disability is a neurological
one. I would like to talk to you about Enabling Women, our leadership program, which I think has shown itself
to successfully increase social inclusion for women with disabilities in a number of ways. I am going to tell you
about the two programs we have run so far in the last year and some of the stories that have come out of that. I
will leave the details of the actual program itself to question time so you have something to ask me.
I am going to use these pictures. I hope logistically it works out okay. This is the graduation of the first
leadership program that occurred in Melbourne, and I am going to tell you some of the stories of these
graduates. The woman right in the middle there with the green card is called Tess. Tess is a member of the Tess
project, and a conversation during the program was a catalyst for this initiative. We were talking about voting
accessibility, and Tess advocated accessibility for people like her who need someone else to help them sign their
voting card. Others spoke up in support, and the Tess project was born. There are five women who are part of
this project. They are Amanda, Jacquie, Tess and Di at the back, and Jill is not in the photo. To date they have
written a campaign letter and sent it to Jeff Pope at the Australian Electoral Commission, and they are
negotiating with him about where to from there. They are doing really well.
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
4
These cards, by the way, say ‘loud, proud and passionate’, which are key words from an iconic song for women
with disabilities. It was a bit of a theme song during the program. Adua is peeping over ‘loud’ over here. Adua
is sight impaired, and she said that after she had done the program she had the confidence to approach her local
MP because she had been having trouble with poor lighting in her street to the extent where taxis would often
drop her off at night-time in the wrong place. She rang her MP, and the problem was fixed within a number of
weeks, so that was a great start for her in terms of speaking up and getting support.
Janice is not in the photo either, but Janice has an intellectual disability and is going to co-facilitate the program
with me in the south-east in the next few months. That will be a program that targets women with intellectual
disabilities. Then we have Trudy right at the end here. Trudy is hearing and sight impaired, and she successfully
applied to join our board because she wanted to learn more about governance so that she could serve on other
boards as well. She has also successfully applied for a mainstream leadership program. So there are some really
great results from the Melbourne program.
I will move to the Gippsland one. The Gippsland program is a little different in that it was very well supported
by a reference group of local service providers who were really dedicated to the extent that one drove three of
the women to and from the program — it was over an hour’s drive each way — because she wanted to make
sure they could get there. This is their graduation. I do not know whether I mentioned that six of these women
have intellectual disabilities, so we had to adjust the content of the program to make is accessible for them. I
think the high attendance demonstrated that we did that successfully.
Who will I tell you about? Leah spoke up at a meeting recently and said she would like to speak about her
experience of community living at the Having a Say conference in Geelong, which was a big step for her. They
were sharing this at a reunion we had a month or so later. Ash, who is here in the photo, was sitting there
literally holding herself in because she was bursting with excitement. Not only had she put her hand up to speak
at a large group on self-advocacy in Melbourne, but she had also been offered a job at her local gym, and she
had accepted both. She is also lined up to do two more presentations at disability-related forums in the next
couple of months, so she is really striding ahead.
Nicole and Rachel have both applied for mainstream leadership programs, which is a pretty big jump when they
have things like sight impairment and cognitive ability to overcome. Julie down here has successfully
negotiated the use of the Paperbark Cafe in Bairnsdale as a place where adults on the spectrum can meet.
Apparently the cafe has designed a spectrum-sensitive menu, and because there is a library there apparently that
is really helpful for people who need some time out to just go and browse among the books. It is really exciting,
and she is really thrilled about it.
They are some of the successes, but there are more in that two of the women have stepped up to be on the
reference group, and the reference group is advocating to run the program themselves in that area so that more
women with disabilities will have access to it. I would like to share two of the quotes that came out of that
reference group to show what they had to say. One is:
For the Wellington participants there was a very real feeling of empowerment, confidence and achievements acquired through the
delivery of this program. This is an important program whose delivery across the state and to as many women as possible must be
supported.
That was Leanne Wishart, the rural access project coordinator.
Then from Glynn Evans at ASIST with DHS:
Overall there is an obvious pride in their sense of achievement and a keenness to expand on their experience and share…with
others.
Glynn and Leanne have both given them a lot of support in stepping out after the program and getting to the
various forums and just going with them and giving them the confidence to do that. The support of that
reference group has been really instrumental in the success of that program, and we are using that model to go
further from here.
The CHAIR — Thank you. If I can perhaps start the question process, you talked about rights and
opportunities in terms of being some of the key issues for exclusion, if you like, and therefore just as applicable
in inclusion. The word ‘barriers’ just continually comes up from people that we hear from. I do not want you to
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
5
just crystallise this into some basic statements. I understand and I welcome the fantastic outcomes that you have
had through these processes, but how do we break those barriers down to ensure that women have those rights
and opportunities that are afforded to anyone else?
Ms HOWE — I think in the same ways that we break down barriers for other groups in the community. We
think a really critical aspect is actually starting with the women themselves — with ourselves as women with
disabilities, making sure that we are having the opportunity to have input into solutions, input into government
policy, input into research. Often evidence-based approaches leave out marginalised groups because they are
not necessarily resourced. The research might not be resourced to include the different needs of the interpreter,
personal care assistant or whatever it is that is needed to be more inclusive.
There is a whole raft of ways, obviously. It needs resourcing. It firstly needs, I think, a disability and a gender
lens put across an issue, just to make sure that if we have got a new program in sport or a new program in
housing or in any aspect of life, we look at that from the perspective of, ‘Okay, we have got disadvantaged
groups here. Are we considering them? Are we looking from a perspective of ethnicity or gender or disability?
What do we need then to involve those different groups as a whole?’. That might be requiring that funding
proposals include specifications around inclusion of those groups, or it might be that government specifically
allocates resources to make sure that groups have got the resources to be inclusive. I think those kind of
cross-government policy and service provision lenses are really an important start — and involvement, working
directly with marginalised groups.
Mr MADDEN — I suppose I am interested in that compounding effect that you were discussing earlier on,
and how those layers of disadvantage compound. Obviously you deal with the issues around disability. Are
there other layers of disadvantage built into that? You have mentioned some of those, and we have heard from
other groups who have talked about the compounding effect of disadvantage or other forms of disadvantage.
Obviously you have got quite complex situations with every individual. Could you just elaborate a little bit
more about the complex needs, I suppose? I am interested in the fact that disability on its own is not necessarily
the cause of disadvantage. It might be, but there are other things that — —
Ms HOWE — Effects.
Mr MADDEN — Yes.
Ms HOWE — Just responding to that question about disadvantage and disability, we make a distinction
between impairment and disability. Impairment on its own does not have to be a great concern; it is the
interaction between impairment and the community, be it attitudes or structural barriers, that creates the
disadvantage. That creates barriers to seeking employment. If you cannot get on a tram or a bus or whatever it
is, if you have not been able to have the same opportunities for education, and if you then factor in that you are a
newly arrived immigrant and that the family already has a whole lot of language barriers to deal with and that
there may be some cultural connotations around disability that, again, mean that disability in some cultures
could be even more of a shame and sometimes attributed as the family’s shame, then that again might prevent
the family from being too active in putting the person forward. That is an example.
In the Indigenous community you have much higher levels of disability than you have in the general population,
because disability is both an outcome of disadvantage as well as a cause of disadvantage. We know all about the
much broader health outcomes for Indigenous people. We have found in recent research we have done on
violence that we have extremely high levels of violence amongst Indigenous women with disabilities. I do not
know whether that answers — —
Mr MADDEN — That is good, particularly that disability can be an outcome or a cause of disadvantage. I
think that really encapsulates it. In a sense, disability may not be, but it can be.
Ms HOWE — It can be. That is right.
Mr MADDEN — And obviously you are dealing with all of those complex issues. That it is an important
point for us to understand — that is, that we have to be aware of not only the causes but the outcomes.
Ms HOWE — Just to add to that, I think Making Rights Reality is a really good example of situating more
specialist services within mainstream services including the Centre Against Sexual Assault providing some
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
6
additional resources around understanding those complexities and understanding what it means to communicate
with someone who has non-verbal communication or who has an intellectual disability — maybe that is not
familiar to the worker, and they need that additional support. That is really important — longer case
management.
Mr MADDEN — Thanks for that point.
Mrs COOTE — There is so much I would like to ask, but since we have you here we have an opportunity to
ask something specific about relationships and what women with disability — with the disadvantages they have
perhaps more than anyone else in the disability sector — experience with forming relationships and holding
relationships and what needs to be done. We are going to be making recommendations on this inquiry. What
sorts of things should we be looking at to make it easier for women to make and sustain really healthy
relationships? You talked about family violence and how more women with a disability have experienced
family violence. Do you have any suggestions on how we could build better opportunities for women to make
and hold relationships?
Ms HARGRAVE — I will point to a great example. Barwon Centre Against Sexual Assault has been
adapting the SAPPSS program, which is the sexual assault prevention program in secondary schools. They
worked with the Nelson Park special developmental school in the Barwon region to adapt the curriculum so that
the boys and the girls across the entire school have access to healthy relationships and healthy sex education
material. That education program was also expanded to involve the staff, so the whole school got an
understanding of women having equal value and agency in relationships.
Another example is the Living Safer Sexual Lives program, which is a step away from the old-fashioned
protective behaviours that we used to teach girls and an acknowledgment that girls are having relationships and
need to be empowered with information about their rights and choices, and likewise boys need to understand
ideas about consent. The Living Safer Sexual Lives program links in with some work that we will be doing in
the future. Keran, did you want to talk about that?
Ms HOWE — Sure. One of the things we are very keen to see is that disability workers understand these
particular issues around the difference between men and women and sex difference in terms of the way you
deliver services, and so we have been funded, through the action plan to reduce violence against women and
children, to develop a workforce development program for disability services. It is a fantastic opportunity to
make inroads into the assumptions that disability workers make around what women want, which they do not
necessarily want.
I think we can say we have some real problems in the culture of disability services in general. I guess this boils
down to attitudes around respect for women. We have women who do not have a choice around whether their
personal intimate care is provided by a man or a woman and we have very poor boundaries — some workers
have no understanding of what might be offensive and inappropriate touching — so all of those are going to be
addressed as part of this program.
It is also challenging the idea that women with disabilities do not have a right to sex education and access to
health services, to pap smears and to the most fundamental kinds of sexual reproductive health. But also in
regard to relationships there is a lot of referencing back to family and the family’s views on what their child
should receive and there is a lot of protecting of women, in particular, that goes on within families, thinking that
if they do not know about sex, then they will not get into trouble. In fact what we know is that the reverse is
true: if you do not know, then you do get into trouble. It is really important that we challenge that gatekeeping
and that we make much better availability of information to women about healthy relationships, as Jen is talking
about.
Mr O’BRIEN — Thank you again for your presentation. Some of the matters have been covered in other
questions, but I was particularly going to focus on the compounding effect of rural and regional issues, which I
think you have touched on in answer to Mr Madden’s question. If there is any more you can add to that, feel
free. You also mentioned the SAPPSS program; I am interested in that, so thank you for that information.
I suppose one aspect of your recommendations that I would not mind drawing out in addition to what you have
said is on page 27 of your submission, where you say:
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
7
A crucial part of a multifaceted policy approach to full and fair employment is ensuring that people who are not in work, or are
changing work, are helped to gain the appropriate set of skills and attributes to participate in quality work.
Particularly with the opportunities that the NDIS provides, could you elaborate on that recommendation and
what specific opportunities for the economy, in a fully inclusive sense, there are in your opinion, especially
again in Geelong, given the circumstances that have occurred in other sectors of traditional manufacturing?
Ms OLDFIELD — One small thing that came up in the program was that of those eight women in
Gippsland, only one had a car. So transport was a really big issue out there, and if those three women had not
been driven to the program, I doubt they could have got there, whereas of the others who took public transport,
one was getting up at 4.00 a.m. to get to the program for 10.30 a.m., and another who lived out in her area just
missed the bus the first time so she did not come after that. So transport in regional areas is really big for people
who cannot afford their own vehicle.
Ms HOWE — Yes. There are a lot of different aspects, and that is a really good example of the rural
disadvantage. With regard to employment and training, women with disabilities seem to be again more
disadvantaged than men with disabilities in access to training programs. Again, that is why we think the NDIS
really needs to be understanding of these disadvantages that gender brings with it. I think we also need training
that begins with the unpacking of ways that women might have received very negative attitudes and
expectations — so examples that Jane’s talked about from a very simple eight-week leadership program or
eight-hour leadership — —
Ms OLDFIELD — Eight modules, four days.
Ms HOWE — Eight-module four-day leadership program that can make a really big difference to women
even seeing themselves as being employable. If all along you have received messages that you are not really up
to speed, you are not really as competent as the next person, then that is internalised, so I think we really need
leadership programs. And I think we need specialist women’s leadership programs as well as general leadership
programs. We want everyone to be able to participate in general community life. I think we do need some
specialist training opportunities as well as personal development type programs.
Mr O’BRIEN — One aspect, if I could, just to draw you out a bit further: another thing we are exploring is
what policy differences need to accommodate women at different stages in life. So we have talked a bit about
young women and things — education et cetera — but what about in other stages of life? Are there specific
policy considerations we need to take into account there?
Ms HOWE — Yes, I think aged care is a huge area where we are again seeing the same kinds of dynamics
that we are seeing in the disability sector with regard to women being exposed to abuse and exploitation. Huge
economic exploitation is being revealed — through the Voices Against Violence report — within the family but
also in service provision and through others. It might just be neighbours. I think at that later stage in life women
are particularly targeted. Our institutional approaches to aged care are failing us, really. So the sorts of
opportunities that we are getting through the national disability insurance scheme it would be good to see rolled
through to the aged-care sector so that there are more flexible ways of providing care. Most people do not want
to go into congregate care; most people want to stay in their own home.
I think another aspect, though this is not necessarily gendered but is critical, is our housing policy. Housing
policy in Australia is lagging behind in terms of universal design, and there have been some regulations that
have been put up — Justin, you will remember — that did not get through in terms of some basic design
standards around accessibility, which means we do not then have huge costs retrofitting inaccessible houses as
people age. It is that whole-of-life approach to housing that I think is macro. They are big policy issues, but they
have major impacts.
Ms HARGRAVE — Can I add something to that?
Ms HOWE — Yes.
Ms HARGRAVE — Our submission spoke about women who have children, so I guess women at that
transitional parts of life. One of our members in the consultation said she would like to see, rather than women
with intellectual disabilities being punished by being referred to child protection, that women be referred to
child maternal health programs for the support they need as mothers with disabilities.
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
8
The CHAIR — Can I ask a question on notice, because in the time left I cannot ask you for an answer?
Given that a recurring theme has been that issue of independence to make decisions — you talked about parents
and family before — I am interested in your thoughts on the difference between an environment where women
essentially are independent versus their living in a service-related community? How do you see that
independence factor playing out, and are there issues that we need to be looking at more for women who are
living within a community environment as opposed to living independently? We will provide that question to
you on notice. If you could provide the committee with an answer, it would be appreciated.
Ms HOWE — Sure.
The CHAIR — On behalf of the committee, I thank you all very much for your contribution today. It is
much appreciated.
Witnesses withdrew.
6 March 2014
Family and Community Development Committee
9