Description
[Abstract – max 200 words]The NDIS was supposed to provide reassurance to ageing carers, as well as more choice and control over their lives to individuals with disabilities. But amid individual plans, and annual service reviews, publicly run or funded services have been replaced with charities who have a business orientation. This approach does not necessarily support a human rights perspective. While it may insist on continual choices being made, many families in my research crave consistency and certainty. Loved ones with cognitive disabilities also find staff and service changes unsettling, leading to behavioural deterioration.
With care and support services increasingly corporatized, outsourced, and sub-contracted, how can deliver a normal life to those with disabilities and their families. Why would some of Australia’s most vulnerable citizens be suddenly expected to become business savvy consumers?
The fact that the NDIS was devised by Australia’s Productivity Commission (the Commonwealth government’s ‘independent research and advisory body on a range of economic, social, and environmental issues’ according to its website) demonstrates the market-based perspective being taken. However, designing economic models is one thing, but knowing how real people react is quite another.
| Period | 17 Mar 2022 → 18 Mar 2022 |
|---|---|
| Event title | 2022 Asia and Oceania Business and Human Rights Doctoral Symposium |
| Event type | Conference |
| Location | AustraliaShow on map |