Daycare discrimination, Arghh!

Post Reply New Topic

I second the au pair recommendation if they are available in Canada. We've had great experiences with the program.

This is the link to the priority of access guidelines, which are set by the federal government, and are from the government website. You can also confirm them by simply asking your local child care centre:

The first places in ANY child care centre MUST be given to children who are deemed to be at risk for child abuse and neglect:
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Earlychildhood/ ... vices.aspx

There is also what is known as Special child care benefit in which a centre without any form of documentation or the like can consider a child at risk of child abuse and neglect and get the child care totally funded by the government for 13 weeks each year:
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Earlychildhood/ ... Sheet8.pdf

I also know for a fact that child protection departments in every state pay huge amounts of money for kids to be in child care so the parents can have some time out away from them and apparently that alone is going to fix the problems the parents are having in rasing their children.

Child care in Australia is very much a location issue. There are drastic shortages in some areas, including some inner city areas and others have vacancies all the time. If you live in a location that is great for child care you are lucky. I have friends on waiting lists for 10 different child care centres, only have the one child and have been on those lists for over 18 months already. It is simply about the areas that they are in. If child care was as simple as walking into the door and asking for a spot the government would not need to have priority of acccess guidelines. There are also huge shortages of staff in many locations and this means that many child care centres are not able to operate at capacity.

Certainly there is now inhome child care for those children with disabilities and/or additional needs and the major problems with that are not funding issues, but the lack of staff to do the work. They simply do not have the carers.

Every state operates their school systems disability services differently. At a federal level there are things in place to provide funding for children in child care centres who do need one on one support, to provide additional funding for family day care as they may need to have less children and/or as additional funding for the additional support required for children in inhome care:
http://www.deewr.gov.au/Earlychildhood/ ... ogram.aspx

Some states assess children every single year for disabibility support, others every few years and some only once off. They all vary in the amount of support offered, as they all classify disability differently and assess needs differently.

@bjcircle

1. There is no poverty of childcare places because people are qualifying as "at risk" and pushing those who are not "at risk" out of childcare in the majority of the country. A quick search on careforkids.com.au for my area showed a number of places available at a number of centres.
2. CCB payments for working/studying "participating" families who qualify, with under school aged children are equivalent to $3.68 per hour. Centres near me charge $70 per day or $5.80 an hour, making each childcare place in a centre cost $25 per day (approx) and $127 per week.
3. Special childcare benefit is to assist people who are in need and/or at risk who do not have $25 per day.

The statement "the government is funding free day care for any parent deemed to be "at risk" of abusing their child and so all the day care spots are taken up with those kids whose parents are doing nothing at all" is untrue. It could very well be the case in at risk areas, but it is not the case for the majority of the country. I would personally rather see at-risk kids IN daycare. The vast majority of parents care for their children and do not claim "at risk" status so they can be rid of their children. If there are parents claiming at risk status so they can be rid of their children, I would extrapolate that the very claim suggests that yes, those children are at risk and should be in the hands of other qualified carers instead of with their parents. Suggesting everyone who needs special childcare benefit go to parenting classes is as reprehensible as suggesting "all" disabled people should work fifteen hours per week irrespective of what that work is or that "all" people who claim benefits should be income managed, etc.

There is no government disability support for children on the spectrum who are not intellectually disabled other than school services. Full stop. If a family has "other needs" we often fall into guidelines for additional support but that is not the standard in Ozstraya. Anyhow the OP is not needing childcare locally so we've probably taken this topic way too far off the point of the thread to begin with.

bjcircle and ominous....

I am counted at risk. Oohhh. I get this classification due to the fact the government brought in that once a child turns 6, a single parent MUST work or seek employment. I have chosen this opportunity to go for a more practical degree which will give me employment above and beyond minimal wage once my youngest turns 6. Thankyou K-Rudd. I wanted to home-school and i would have been able to if my ex and i spit a few months previously.

I get JET (jobs, education and Training) payment so it costs me 10cents per hour my children are in care and my son gets a fully funded one on one support worker.

I am just lucky i am a single mother with a disabled child who is bi-lingual and has little family support.

You can home school if you're interested. I actually sent you a pm with the details, not sure if you got that yet. I'm also "at risk" but my son is school age so we don't qualify for assistance with care (combined with the fact that he can't go into trad afterschool or holiday care programs). It wasn't Rudd who brought in the "participation" legislation, it was Howard. Rudd just didn't change it, so to my mind both governments are equally accountable. If someone suggested I should have to take a mandatory parenting class because I'm "at risk" I would flip my lid.

There's no childcare for us despite the fact that I "participate" by attending University, home educate my son, am a sole parent and migrant, and my son has ASD which prevents him from attending school (we do get some financial assistance due to this but only because he is considered medically "isolated"). I'm grateful for that but it still doesn't cover the income I lost leaving work to home educate. Overall I don't expect others to look after us and am grateful to live in a place where people still do, because where I come from originally people just don't. I also hope to give back to the community when my son is able to be more independent and, if all of this home education works out the way I hope, he will also be able to give back to the community.

I think we've lost a lot of perspective when it comes to sole parenting and disability in this country. I see us going the way of "that other country" and that scares me a lot. I don't like our long term prospects if that continues.

No under Howard i could have home-schooled. One of the last things Rudd brought in was people with a post grad couldn't get exemption. Grrr.

No, that's not true. Anyone in this country can home educate and get a participation exemption. I don't know where you are getting your information from but it is incorrect. There is nothing in Social Security law that states you can get an exemption unless you have a post graduate degree. If your personal circumstances make it better for you to choose a different path, that is obviously something you need to examine for your own family. You can, however, get an exemption to home educate if that is what you wish to do.

http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/guides_acts/s ... 11.60.html
Act reference: SSAct section 5C Home educators, section 542FA(3), (3C), (6), and (7) Disabled children or other family circumstances exemption (YA), section 602C(3), (3C), (6), and (7) Relief from activity test-people with disabled children and other circumstances (NSA)
Policy reference: SS Guide 1.1.S.66 Definition of secondary pupil child, 1.1.M.10 Definition of main supporter

I was advised by CSA, Centrelink and Family assisstance office about this. It has something to do with CSA demanding that someone can earn "x" amount of $ by working and CL/ FAO don't have to supplement income because CSA informs them i can earn "Y" amount of money. This usually only applys to the non custodial parent until Rudd's changes in equal parenting.

You were advised incorrectly. You wouldn't be the first.

The major catalyst for me is my ex-husband. I fall through so many cracks at the moment. I have researched and even 1 year ago i could have, but now i can't. It is awful. My option at the moment is to go a small school with less then 150 students and only have them enrolled part time and home educate the other half. It is a really weird place to be.

Also off topic.... Are you bi..... I like you? If not..... You are great!

Well, to the first bit of this, it is actually against the law for anyone in any of those three departments to say you cannot home educate because you have a post graduate degree. If your ex doesn't want you to, that is a barrier that would be difficult to work around (it's been done but it's a horrible process like everything else since the Family Law Amendment (Shared Parental Responsibility) Act 2006.

If you want to home educate, trust me that your post graduate degree (even if you were a medical doctor, etc.) would be absolutely no legal barrier to home educating and retaining benefits. I sort of made it my "special interest" to advocate for sole parent's rights in home education (and the legislation around that) because I was told many of the same things.

I had originally intended to home educate, but ended up single and was told/figured it would be next to impossible. I did exactly what you're doing (found a small school, community based, yadda yadda). Unfortunately that option didn't work out for us (we also didn't have a part time option which might have worked). I found out I was misinformed (which is the nice way to put it) by the powers that be. I was not only lied to but "that social welfare department" has broken the law regarding our case and were only unapologetic about it because I was able to point out that they had done so before I actually suffered based on what they had determined (ie. I threw a fit and threw the legislation in their faces and they fixed the determination before it affected us/our next pay period).

I will say my son's dx has changed a lot of things. That and having a very supportive specialist Paediatrician who looked me in the eye and said, "What you're doing is probably the best thing you could do. The schools really don't do much at all for these kids." He said he'd happily sign anything I needed and all I had to do was send whatever it was in and tell him where to sign (to save money on private appointments). I now have letters from him that I shove in people's faces when they decide they know what's best for my son.

To the second bit: I had a long term relationship with a woman and I've had a long term relationship with a man. I don't think I'm bi, though. I don't really know what I am. I'm celibate sapiosexual, maybe. I'm just ominous, really.

Gah..... I have researched the whole sha-bang. It is now based on what i could earn if i didn't have children in my care same as ex not having children in his care so CSA is divided equal. I hate the government sometimes. As soon as my daughter turns 6 because i am a qualified teacher, i am assessed at the same as ex, so i get no benefits+ no csa, = up poo creak quite frankly. IT SUCKS!

I still contend you're incorrect, but I like you anyhow. We can't all be as correct as I am all of the time, it's a curse I just have to live with.

Care for Kids is hardly the government. They are a child care provider and I am thrilled to know that they have child care locally to YOU. Please do not say that child is freely avaible anywhere. You should also realise that on top of child care benefit there is also child care tax rebate, which pays for an additional 50% of out of pocket costs.

As for no child that does not have an intellectual disabilty not being entitled to ANY services you are WRONG. I do know that one of my carers provides 5 hours of respite care a week government funded to a child with aspergers, that this child is in a full time standard state secondary school and without any support at all at school as she does not require it and yet her parents are still getting respite care. And I certainly know of many many parents of children with physical disabilities who are not intellectually disabled, who get respite care, parents of children with vision and hearing impairments who are not intellectaully disabled who get respite care and other services. The government DOES fund integration funding for children with disabilities to attend outside school hours care services and they also fund a teenagers with disabilities school holiday program and I know many parents who recieve those services for children who are NOT intellectually disabled.

This list of state laws can lead you to state defintions of Disability for the purposes of state funded Disability Services. Just because there are no specialised services set up to support people in your situation does not mean that you have no legal right to any such service. Even in states that still have total block funding for disability services, there are individual cases of parents who have gone to court and won the right to manage a budget for their child. The fact is in legislation ALL Australian states do NOW consider Autism to be a disability in its own right. Sure there is the total lack of funding for any disability services. There is the bigger problem of the attitude of the professionals staffing the intake services. They have no training in Autism and cannot understand what they cannot see. If they cannot see a physical disability or they cannot see an intellectual disability then they assume that people should just be able to fix themselves, that they can cope, etc, etc. But to say that they are not legally entitled to services is simply not the case. And as for absolutely nothing but school support, well I thought that everyone was aware of the 20 sessions available under Medicare for children under 15. Sure I think that amount is pathetic, and nowhere near enough, and I do know that Autism programs are fighting for 20 sessions per year, but there is also the enhanced primary care plan, the mental health care plan, etc and the fact is there is no requirement for a child to be intellectually disabled to recieve any of these services.

Sure the system sucks, and no one disputes that and yes it is bloody hard to get any support at all, but the fact is legally you are entitled to support from your states disability services and to medicare rebates for therapy and the like. It is though up to you as to how much you want to fight for that support, and what the individual problems of your child is.

While parents might be entitled to get Centrelink benefits for homeschooling children, different states vary in what is required for home schooling. Some have very stringent requirements put onto parents, and others do not require anything at all. Sure you need the income support to do so, but you also need state law to support it. Education is a state based system and under the constitution states have the power to make laws in regards to education. There are some states in which it is incredibly difficult to homeschool. Sure there are none in which it is illegal, but there certainly are some in which it may as well be. The other option you can have is that of distance education. ALL states have distance education which you can use for medical need and while I doubt the teachers would understand autism per say, if you can teach them the curriculum you would then have all the basic materials presented to you.

New South Wales:
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/maint ... 993+cd+0+N

ACT:
http://www.legislation.act.gov.au/a/1991-98/default.asp

QLD:
http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGIS ... ervA06.pdf

VIC:
http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/domin ... 80a015.pdf

SA:
http://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A ... 01993.aspx

NT:
http://notes.nt.gov.au/dcm/legislat/leg ... enDocument

WA:
http://www.slp.wa.gov.au/legislation/st ... epage.html

TAS:
http://www.thelaw.tas.gov.au/tocview/in ... rec=;term=

@bjcirceleb: You're all over the shop and with all due respect I don't have the personal patience for this level of back and forth, which is certainly an issue for me and not you. Care for Kids is not a childcare provider, it is a website where parents can search for care for their children. I hope you can access some assistance with your struggles in future.