More correspondance from Mervin:

 

 

14 February, 2003

 

 

 

Dear Anne-Marie Jefferies

 

complaint concerning pharmac

Thank you for your emails of 12 February, at 4:18pm and 6:03pm which Mervin Singham has asked me to respond to. 

Your views have been carefully considered and noted and we are sorry you are so disappointed with our decision.   As Mervin advised you by letter dated 3 February, you have the right to contact the Director of Human Rights Proceedings and can do so, in the first instance, by emailing his secretary Pam Rowe.

Should the Director of Human Rights Proceedings take a different view of the complaint, then he may refer it back to the Commission to attempt mediation or he may take it to the Human Rights Tribunal. 

 

Yours sincerely

 

Geraldine

 

My correspondance:

 

 

 

 

What I would like to look at is getting a full overview of your rights system where it concerns disabled people in New Zealand and for it to not be too dissimilar to the UK’s policies where rights of disabled people are concerned.  I haven’t had chance to read your DDA here in NZ-I’ll be going over it later today.  I have however, read the UK’s DDA and to be quite honest my son’s disability in THAT act of theirs comes within the description of disability.  When we talk about "difficulty getting to the pharmacy" exactly how often does it have to be difficult here?  Once twice or all the time.  If you don’t KNOW when there could be difficulty getting to the pharmacy--then what category do you fit into?  I am sorry but that in a schedule that is designed to help people who are disabled is a little lame a line to clarify to pharmacist’s or Doctor’s where it comes to describing how a person needs to collect their med’s.  I don’t KNOW when my son will not be able to collect his script when he is older!  he could have a crisis at anytime it is unpredictable.  The same goes for people with diabetes!  Or an epileptic, but the fact is "difficulty getting to the pharmacy"is not in depth enough to pharmacists and at the end of the day there are times when ALL people who care for disabled kids, adults or actually HAVE a disability (as outlined in the UK’s DDA) are going to find it difficult to get there and should therefore ALL be able to self exempt.  This in itself is not good enough and "excludes" many disabled people from their access exemption criteria.  THAT is discrimination--I keep telling you, but you don’t recognize it for what it really is.  

 

I have four healthy children at home and it is seldom that we need to get medications of take them to the Doctor’s.  So I KNOW what I am talking about here and I KNOW the difference between what is disabled and what is NOT disabled ok.  The very fact that I have to get up at 3am in the morning and give this kid stuff to keep him alive as far as I am concerned until his growth is complete as far as I am concerned separates me from the REST of the people who DON’T even have to use that damn schedule because they seldom have to have their children on drugs beyond three months unless they have asthma!   I feel like you just patronized me and are trying to make me feel that the job I do is not really that important here.  That I don’t deserve to have MY life made easier as a carer because I DON’T have to do as much as the other parent’s of kid’s with disabilities that go and use the pharmacy three monthly as I do and have actually been catered for!  

 

I have cut, pasted and highlighted the UK’s DDA for your attention here.  In case you hadn’t noticed ALL people caring for children with disabilities (no matter how trivial anyone thinks they are) are inclusive as disabled in their eyes.  When Pharmac use such terms as "difficulty getting to the pharmacy" or "living more than 30 minutes away" effectively they are categorically "excluding" a great deal of the disabled population in this country and NO disabled person should have to ask for "permission" to be exempt from the monthly dispensing of med’s when they are making "allowances" for "some" disabled people.  This is discrimination clear and simple and it is done in a very sly and inappropriate way.   You know it too!  Why are you allowing this to happen?  All I can think is that your DDA is not up to standards that it is in the UK.  So I;d like you to read it and I’d like a copy of your’s to ascertain WHY you feel there have to be different levels of "inconvenience" here at all.   I should NOT have to go through legal avenues to have people see common sense where this matter is concerned.  

 

It is HIGH time that Pharmac recognised that "difficulty getting to the pharmacy" in their access exemption section of the schedule is simply NOT good enough.  That you people "feel" it is not an inconvenience or demeaning to have to ask a Doctor for the script to be noted "certified exempt" is an absolute travesty actually given the fact that in and "ideal" world, you people would realise that ANYONE whom has a disability (as outlined by the DDA below in the UK) WILL have difficulty at some point getting down to the pharmacy for their med’s and that even ONE occasion of that difficulty arising for my son could cause death.  Not just difficulty getting wheel chair access.  The point is, people who have the type of disability that my son has have "unpredictable" outcome where getting access to their scripts are concerned.  Why the hell should they have to ASK their GP or specialist to sign a script when other’s don’t then?  Is this treating ALL disabled people equal where the supply of goods and services are concerned.   I am a very intelligent person and I feel demeaned because somehow even having to ask this question of Doctor’s when other’s are afforded "simplicity" and have their lives made majorly easier by being allowed to self exempt from the schedule.  How you can sit in judgment and actually determine this by "levels" of inconvenience is beyond me!  How backwards and demeaning is that?

 

I can tell you now that if your DDA does not read like the UK one below "exactly" then as a country of the Crown, your DDA  is not covering ALL disabled people in New Zealand.   You cannot have "some" benefits of being part of the crown and disclude some "benefits" because it doesn’t you.  Rights for disabled people should be similar worldwide and if your are like this then you are certainly NOT implementing them on this occasion.    That is because, if your DDA is excluding certain types of disability and rendering disabled people either LESS or MORE able--on a petty scale, it is nothing short of discrimination also.  I have been in touch with Pam Row about the matter, but I wish to read your DDA and compare it along side this one for future dealings.  I have a feeling that I am going to be suing it alot from now on because I will no longer tolerate ignorance and exclusion to ANY level whatsoever where my son is concerned.  Whether you feel it is mild or not quite inconvenient enough or whatever!

 

Regards,

 

A Jefferies

 

http://www.drc.org.uk/drc/RightsAndRequirements/Page111.asp

 

UK Rights Overview

 

Overview of Your Rights Under the Disability Discrimination Act

 

If you are disabled, or have had a disability, the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) makes it unlawful for you to be discriminated against in the areas of:

 

employment;
 
access to goods and services;
 
and the management, buying or renting of land or property.
 
The DDA was passed in 1995 to introduce new measures aimed at ending the discrimination which many disabled people face in these areas.

 

To find out more about the DDA, visit DDA Overview and Legislation.

 

What counts as a disability?

 

The DDA describes a disabled person as ’anyone with a physical or mental impairment, which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect upon their ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities’. This is meant to be a fairly wide definition and includes:

 

physical impairment this includes weakening or adverse change of a part of the body caused through illness, by accident or from birth. For example, amongst many other situations, blindness, deafness, heart disease, the paralysis of a limb or severe disfigurement.

mental impairment this can include learning disabilities and all recognised mental illnesses.

 

For example, mental illnesses specifically mentioned in the World Health Organisation’s International Classification of Diseases are very likely to be included.
 
substantial - this does not have to be severe, but is more minor or trivial.
 
long-term adverse effect that has lasted or is likely to last more than 12 months.
 
a normal day-to-day activity that is, one that affects one of the following: your mobility; manual dexterity; physical co-ordination; continence; ability to lift, carry or otherwise move everyday objects; speech, hearing or eyesight; memory or ability to concentrate, learn or understand; or perception of the risk of physical danger. It does not include the ability to work because no particular form of work is ‘normal’ for most people.
 
When considering the effects of a disability against the description above, focus on the condition itself, and what it would be like without any medical treatment (for examples diabetes controlled without insulin), or equipment (such as a hearing aid).  The only exception to this rule is where poor eyesight is improved by wearing glasses or contact lenses.  In this case the effects that count are those which remain even with the glasses or lenses.
 
What doesn’t count as a disability?

 

Certain conditions are not considered impairments under the DDA:

 

lifestyle choices such as tattoos and non-medical piercings;
tendency to steal, set fires, and physical or sexual abuse of others;
exhibitionism and voyeurism;
hayfever, if it doesn’t aggravate the effects of an existing condition;
addiction to or a dependency on alcohol, nicotine or any other substance, other than the substance being medically prescribed;
For further information on this, refer to the publication ‘Definition of Disability’ in Publications.

 

How can I tell whether I have been discriminated against?
To help you decide whether you have encountered discrimination and have grounds for complaint, some simple assessment questions can be asked.

 

To see guidance questions relating to discrimination in relation to access to employment please visit Employment Discrimination Assessment Guide.

 

To see guidance questions relating to discrimination in relation to access to goods, facilities or services, please visit Goods, Facilities and Services Discrimination Assessment Guide.

 

What can I do if I think that I have encountered discrimination?
For information on what to do if you believe you have encountered discrimination on the grounds of a disability and to resolve the problem, please visit Making a Complaint.

 

For information on the DRC’s Conciliation Service, visit Conciliation Service.

 

For further information relating to some frequently asked questions relating to this topic, please visit Frequently Asked Questions.

 

* I’d like you to note here finally, that unless your DDA cover’s similar to this, that you yourselves are not able to do your job’s properly because you are callously excluding many people disabled people within this country from the term "disabled" which unfortunately comes in many guises as you MUST know and many variations of levels of inconvenience, and therefore you are not dealing with their human rights issues in the proper way.  For anyone to write to me and tell me that what I have to do in asking any Doctor to sign that script "certified exempt"  is  "not inconvenient enough" (in other words TOO trivial) I have to say now--I am disgusted.  Whether YOU consider it TOO trivial or not too trivial please note as far as the UK DDA is concerned, it is only the mere fact that I give my son the medication each day that he is even breathing!  My job as a carer should be made AS simple as any other disabled person’s carer’s job!  You people should be looking to make it that way, not sitting and passing judgment in ignorance and deeming my job as a carer any LESS taxing than anyone else’s that is "included" in their access exemption criteria!  That goes for Pharmac too!  I will not rest until these matter’s are sorted and until ALL of the disabled population of the country are getting their rights to "self exempt" from that schedule because people in positions like yours think it is "not inconvenient enough."   Sorry but ANY LEVEL of inconvenience is TOO MUCH inconvenience and Mervin Singham has absolutely NO RIGHT to judge otherwise.  So I will be in touch with Pam Rowe and for that matter I am also in touch with a lady called Judy Small who deals with Disability issues in New Zealand and she has passed all my emails to the Ministry of Health for their attention.  What a pity you people could have not made my life a little easier though by dealing with it fairly in the first place.

 

 

Woudn’t you think that these guys of ALL people would not be so biased?