Jarvis and Enid
Content Warning: These stories are about violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation and may include references to suicide or self-harming behaviours. They may contain graphic descriptions and strong language and may be distressing. Some narratives may be about First Nations people who have passed away. If you need support, please see Contact & support.
Jarvis is in his 30s, has cerebral palsy and uses a wheelchair. Jarvis spoke to the Royal Commission with help from his advocate, Enid.
Jarvis and his partner bought a house in a regional area. Enid said the NDIA has since refused to fund a ramp so he can access his house.
‘The problem is both the front and back door have steps, so he was wanting a ramp for the front door only,’ Enid told the Royal Commission. ‘It’s been rejected a couple of times … It’s only about two or three steps.’
Jarvis uses a powered wheelchair that’s too heavy for anyone to lift up the steps. To get into his home, Jarvis has to go to his mum’s house nearby.
‘[I leave my] power chair at my mum’s,’ said Jarvis.
Jarvis is then driven back to his house where he pulls himself up the front steps using the handrail. He has a manual wheelchair inside the home.
‘If he wants to go out for the day,’ said Enid, ‘he has to go back to his mum’s the next day to get his power chair to go out.’
Enid said it appears the NDIA rejected the ramp because Jarvis didn’t consult them enough before he and his partner bought the house, even though they paid for the house themselves.
‘So, I think the reason for rejection was there was not enough evidence to show they looked around before they purchased this one.’
Enid said Jarvis did a lot of research before buying the house, and consulted his occupational therapist.
‘I’m not sure what justifies enough evidence, to be honest.’
Disclaimer: This is the story of a person who shared their personal experience with the Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability through a submission or private session. The names in this story are pseudonyms. The person who shared this experience was not a witness and their account is not evidence. They did not take an oath or affirmation before providing the story. Nothing in this story constitutes a finding of the Royal Commission. Any views expressed are those of the person who shared their experience, not of the Royal Commission.