SENATE SPEECHES
horizontal rule

Disability Bill 2004: Report Stage
21 June 2005

Dr. Henry: I move amendment No. 2:

In page 6, line 17, after "impairment" to insert ", a person who has a physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long term adverse effect on his ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities".

As the Minister of State is aware, concern has been expressed in some quarters that a condition such as multiple sclerosis or, as the Minister of State himself put it, bipolar disorder, might not be covered by the Bill because, while the condition is enduring, its signs and symptoms may not be.

In the June edition of Insight, Ireland's health and social affairs monthly, an article details minor changes pledged to the Bill. It states in this article that when the Disability Legislation Consultation Group met the Taoiseach, he confirmed that episodic conditions are covered in the Bill's definition of disability. Despite what the Minister of State said last week when I asked if a condition had to be enduring, or if it would suffice if there were signs and symptoms with remissions and relapses, Senator Norris felt this amendment was advisable.

I seek the assurance of the Minister of State, Deputy Fahey, that as the Taoiseach said, conditions which are episodic come under the definition of disability. While 50% of multiple sclerosis cases are progressive, the other 50%, thankfully, are only on-and-off cases. This is why Senator Norris and I tabled this amendment.

Ms Terry: I second the amendment.

...

Dr. Henry: That is what I needed to hear to reassure people that episodic conditions are covered. I hope the provisions of this Bill are applied as flexibly as possible. It is important that people with a disability can get back to work when their condition improves. I am pleased to say the Department of Social and Family Affairs has improved in this regard in recent years. If people are allowed to accept an opportunity to work without losing benefits when they are in better health it can result in a significant improvement to their condition. Several patients have contacted me on this point. Just because people are disabled at some point it does not mean they will never get better. People can improve some months later and we need to be mindful of the episodic nature of some conditions because it benefits all of us if they are able to work. It also enhances an individual's quality of life and self-esteem. I hope the Department of Social and Family Affairs will continue to interpret the situation in this way.

...

Dr. Henry: I second the amendment. Statements were made to the effect that the requirement for facilities to be provided would depend on how often disabled people would try to get into a given building. If people know they cannot get into a building they are not going to try, so Senator Terry's amendments would encourage private bodies engaged in public business or providing services funded by the public purse to comply. I ask the Minister to accept these amendments.

...

Dr. Henry: I second the amendment. This amendment would be to the Minister of State's advantage as he would be able to inform those groups which maintain there are inadequacies in the Bill that a review has been planned and that they need not worry. He could tell them the Bill will be reviewed and essential issues will be addressed. If people have been inadvertently excluded from the legislation - I am sure that as far as the Minister of State is concerned, it would be inadvertent - in two or three years' time they will have their opportunity to state they feel they have been short-changed.

...

Dr. Henry: Senator Kett makes an interesting point. He and I have often taken part in case conferences about patients. The thrust of Senator Terry's amendment is very important because those running the case conferences may not always be the best people to decide the applicant's greatest needs. We also have a worry about resources and these amendments show a great deal of respect for the person who is being assessed. This is why I would like to support both amendments, because respect for the person and for the person's wishes is very important.

As Senator Kett pointed out, the parents of a child may give different priorities than those who are involved in the case conference. However, those of us involved in the case conferences are not living at home with the child. Parents might have a more realistic idea on what would make the child's life better, as well as what would make their life more bearable.

Visit the Irish Government Website for the full text of this speech: Click Here

bullet Speech Menu
bullet Top