The Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability has released its final report, and in this series we explain what the Commission’s 222 recommendations mean for a more inclusive Australia.
The release of the Disability Royal Commission’s final report has vividly illustrated the appalling treatment of people with disabilities in Australia.
Shortly before the report was released, and following media reports of abuse and neglect, NDIS chair Tracey McKee said anyone on the scheme who was concerned about the care they were receiving and did not have anyone to advocate for them should contact the scheme’s quality and safety commission.
But this does not take into account the systemic barriers faced by people with communication disabilities: for many, making a phone call or completing an online form without support is not possible.
Communication is a human right
The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the “right to freedom of opinion and expression.”
Recognising this, the Disability Royal Commission made specific recommendations around enabling independence and access through “communication access”, acknowledging that failing to do so can lead to worse health, education, employment and justice outcomes, and increased risk of harm during emergencies and natural disasters.
Access to communication is necessary for everyone in society, but is particularly important for the 1.2 million Australians living with a communication disability.
Read more: Why we need disability rights laws, not just disability discrimination laws
But what does “communication access” mean?
Communication comes in many different forms: we convey meaning through spoken and written words, sign language, gestures, pictures and digital forms, facial expressions, vocalisations and physical expressions, and through these we can communicate our needs, thoughts and concerns.
The key is that for any communication endeavor to be successful, forms of communication must be acknowledged, valued and supported. Regardless of an individual’s abilities or disabilities, our environment has a significant impact on our communication success.
Over the past 40 years, there has been a significant change in attitudes towards people with disabilities in Australia, and there is now a legal right for people with disabilities to have choice and control.
The independent review of the NDIS is due to report by the end of this month, with pressure on costs and growth to ensure sustainability. But accessible communication environments need to be designed and resources provided to enable people to communicate and make choices.
Communication comes in many forms. ABO PHOTOGRAPHY/Shutterstock
What is it like living with a communication disorder?
Every day, people face barriers to receiving and sharing information. These barriers can impact how people have meaningful interactions and feel safe. Poor communication options can make it difficult to get medical care, navigate public transportation, or even order a coffee.
The Disability Royal Commission has revealed costly failures, with devastating consequences for the lack of agency of people with communication disabilities.
Communication barriers exist in the context of high rates of abuse, violence and deprivation of basic needs such as food, shelter and assistive devices. These rates are almost double those reported for people without disabilities.
Read more: Disability Royal Commission hears horrific stories of harm – now we must move towards repairing it
What is communication access?
Communications access occurs when everyone can access information and get their message across in a meaningful way, which the Commission called “an important safeguard against violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation.”
However, common approaches to communication accessibility (including those used by government agencies such as the National Disability Insurance Agency, which administers the NDIS) are of limited value.
For example, the commonly adopted Easy Read format (which combines text, layout, and images to explain information) lacks standardized design principles and is only useful for supporting certain groups.
Universal design principles can go some way to supporting agency for people with communication disabilities. These principles aim to recognize, value, and accommodate a wide range of users of a particular product or environment, but also require consideration of individual communication requirements.
Read more: Straw bans may be good for the planet, but not for people with disabilities or swallowing problems. What is ‘eco-abilism’?
What happens next?
Calls for improved communications access have been coming for years, and while the commission’s recommendations are an important step, the real work is yet to come.
Any government task force acting on the committee’s recommendations should start by acknowledging the expertise of people with communication disabilities.
Co-design is a core tenet of the NDIS, but people with communication disabilities are often unable to share their views. Therefore, governments must explore ways to make co-design communicatively accessible. This includes leveraging multiple communication modes, such as visual aids, keywords, augmentative communication and physical forms of expression. People with communication disabilities must play a central role at all stages of the policy design process, as informants, design partners and users.
The NDIS funding model must cover making an individual’s support and service network an accessible communication environment. People with communication disabilities say time, ongoing engagement and relationship-building are essential. Strategies will vary from person to person, but practical considerations include ensuring access to assistive technologies and devices, offering choice, checking their own understanding and paying attention to non-verbal communication.
The costs of doing so are offset by economic values such as better health and well-being, employment, education, health, leisure and access to justice.
As the Disability Royal Commission showed, inadequate oversight caused significant harm and inadequate safety and incident reporting measures increased the risks for people who faced barriers to raising concerns.
At a minimum, communication access standards should ensure that disability service providers have a basic level of skills to recognise and support diverse forms of communication. Feedback and complaint mechanisms should also go beyond traditional written and verbal forms of communication.
As a community, we must learn from the stories and experiences shared with the Disability Royal Commission, but also from how people with disabilities have been supported to provide them. By recognising communication diversity and providing communication supports, we now have an opportunity to build inclusive environments.