Diane
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.
Not long ago Diane, early 30s, had a random accident at the beach and injured her spine. She has paraplegia and uses a wheelchair.
Shortly after she left hospital she returned to work two days a week in a different, temporary role. When the role ended her employer terminated her contract because they said she wasn’t able to perform her usual duties.
‘I was still fully capable of working, they just didn’t give me the opportunity,’ Diane told the Royal Commission.
Her managers ‘strongly discouraged’ her from making a complaint. ‘I just knew there was no way that they were going to let me stay.’
Diane’s employer also provided her housing, so she needed to find alternative accessible housing for her and her dog.
‘I’ve lived alone since I was 20, and I didn’t see why I should have to go and live in a group home because I have a disability.’
Diane found a supported disability accommodation (SDA) unit in a complex nearby and contacted the accommodation provider.
‘They were just amazing at helping me with the application process,’ she said.
But the NDIS refused Diane’s request, instead approving ‘improved livability … in a share house’.
‘I’m in a wheelchair, I need fully accessible. I didn’t get it … Wheelchair users need a minimum of fully accessible because that gets you the bathroom that’s accessible, and the same with the kitchen.’
Diane contacted a second provider and inspected an SDA unit in another complex. Even though she didn’t have the right funding, they would allow her to move in on the basis she asked the NDIS to review its decision. If she wasn’t successful, she would have six months to vacate the property. Also, she would have to use their supported independent living (SIL) provider.
‘I had to give them four hours a day at a cost of 100 grand a year … but I wasn’t able to get out of bed until 10 am because their early morning slots were full.’
Diane was shocked.
‘They say it’s all about choice and control, yet they were forcing me to use their SIL provider.’
Unsure what to do, Diane went back to the first provider and asked them to help her challenge the NDIS decision.
‘I was fortunate … they have connections with people and they made a couple of phone calls. And then I got a phone call [from the NDIS] apologising, and just said, “Human error” and I got given fully accessible … and I got sole occupancy so I could live alone.’
Diane’s dog, who had been badly abused, became unsettled after the move so she sent him to behaviour training for a short while. Two days before he was due to come home the support provider sent her a pet safety agreement.
They wanted Diane to muzzle and tie up her dog and to accept unlimited liability for any damages. If she didn’t sign the agreement they would withdraw their services.
‘This caused a lot of tension between me and them … I thought that I was not going to have a carer, and I felt like I was being threatened. I feel like when you have a disability you are a bit more vulnerable.’
The provider eventually came to an agreement with Diane, but over time reduced or cancelled services, often with no notice. They would blame the COVID-19 pandemic.
Diane is slowly transferring services to a new provider and has found them so much better. ‘The difference in service is crazy.’
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.