Author Archives: Admin

Posts by 'admin' on the Engage Mental-Health News and Events Blog are shared on behalf of third parties to help make information about mental-health news and events easier to find and do not necessarily reflect the views of Engage Aotearoa or Community Mental-Health Resources Trust. News and events posted with the tag 'Engage Updates' are written by and/or about Engage Aotearoa.

No. 109: Create Something Simple to Have Faith in

August 11, 2012 6:59 pm ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ admin

This week, in order to attain, maintain or regain my sense of wellbeing…

… I will practice coping with uncertainty by creating a simple vision for the future that I can have faith in achieving and then reminding myself of it on a regular basis. First of all, I will think of the simple things I would like to see in my future. I will make sure I think of positive and realistic things, that I could have faith in achieving or maintaining if I put my mind to it. I could list things like being close to my family, a safe place to live, regular healthy meals or a daily routine I enjoy. Second, I will visualise or imagine what a day would look and feel like in that future. I will try my best to bring a realistic and detailed picture of it into my mind, from waking up in the morning to going to bed at night. Finally, I will write down all of the things I imagined I did and experienced as part of that day. As I move through my week, I will regularly bring my mind back to that simple vision of my future and remind myself that no matter where I am now, my vision of the future is where I will one day be. If I find this hard, I might set an alarm on my phone to remind me to spend a moment visualising it. Whenever I can, I will mindfully do what I imagined I would do in the course of a day in my vision of the future. In this way, I really can have faith that I will gradually get there and I will give myself small bits of evidence that helps me have hope every day. When I am familiar with creating a simple vision and visualising it throughout the day, I will add it to my Personal Coping Kete as a strategy for self-soothing and engagement in times of stress, distress or mental unwellness. When I am finding it hard to have hope, I will focus my attention on creating something I can have hope in. By spending time visualising a positive picture of my future and reminding myself of the small things I can do to achieve it, I can actively balance any worried thoughts I might be having about how things are going to turn out and leave room for the possibility that everything will turn out okay in the end.

Posted in: Engagement, Mindful Distraction, Self-Soothing ⋅ Tagged: distraction, gratitude, humor, perspective, positive thinking, social connection, Stress Management

SAVE DISABILITY LAW Update

August 10, 2012 12:29 am ⋅ admin

An update from Auckland Disability Law

Friday 10 August 2012

A successful hui was held last Monday, 30^th July at Western Springs Community Hall. ADL had around 80 people attend to hear from our esteemed speakers. Huge thanks to everyone who attended and to Esther for filming and editing the highlights for us.

Some highlights from the hui click below for some video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c5t152AQ9s8

See link below for the article Aucklander magazine

http://m.theaucklander.co.nz/news/uncertain-future-for-auckland-disability-law/1488478/

Article on 30 July talking about our public hui

http://nz.news.yahoo.com/a/-/top-stories/14401570/push-to-keep-specialist-disability-law-service-going/

Find out about our campaign in NZSL

Thank you Seeflow.co.nz

https://seeflow.co.nz/service/nzsl_letter/action/present/service_id/1695/

It’s not to late to sign the open letter to Justice Minister Judith Collins

How to sign:

Email your name to info@adl.org.nz and we will add you as an email signatory to our list. If your organisation has not yet signed, ask them to support us.

Post it to us at Auckland Disability Law, PO Box 43 201, Mangere, Auckland

Fax it back to us on 09 275 4693 or scan it and email to info@adl.org.nz

Finally, you can print it out and post it directly to Minister of Justice, Judith Collins http://www.beehive.govt.nz/minister/judith-collins

If you are signing on behalf of an organisation, please be sure that you have authority to do so.

If you have already written to Justice Minister Judith Collins directly, thank you for the support. Please let us know if you have done this – we would like to add your name or organisation to the open letter with all the names and logos of our supporters that we will present to the Minister.

What else you can do

You can write your own letter to Minister of Justice Judith Collins http://www.beehive.govt.nz/minister/judith-collins or to the Minister for Disability Issues, Hon Tariana Turia

http://www.beehive.govt.nz/minister/biography/tariana-turia

Lobby your local MP, Councillor or Local Board

You can lobby, write to or talk to your Local MP. Click link below for list of MPs http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/

Click here to find your local board (Auckland Council): http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz/EN/AboutCouncil/representativesbodies/LocalBoards/Pages/Findyourwardandlocalboard.aspx

Let us know how your communications with them were received.

Write to the newspapers, or put out your own press release

Follow on Facebook

Search and click the ‘like’ button on the Auckland Disability Law Facebook page

Milestone for the Campaign

A huge thanks to the more than one hundred individuals and all these groups and organisations that have signed so far (please let us know if you have signed and we have accidentally missed you off the list):

155 Community Law centre, Whangarei
Association of Blind Citizens NZ
Auckland Action Against Poverty
Auckland Branch of the Association of Blind Citizens of New Zealand
Auckland Disability Providers network
BDBInc
Buckingham Law
CCS Disability Action
Chair, Homeworks Trust
Citizen Advocacy Auckland Inc.
Citizens Against Privatisation
Community Law Canterbury
Community Law Centres o Aotearoa
Deaf Aotearoa
Deaf Christian Community Services –
Disabled Persons Assembly Dunedin
Disabled Persons Assembly NZ
DSAG Disability Strategic Advisory Group – Auckland Council
EDGE Employment
Elevator Group
Employment Dispute Solutions
Engage Aotearoa
Green Party of New Zealand
Grey Power Community
Home and Family Counselling
IHC
Justice Action Group
Kaitaia Community House
Mana Tangata Turi O Tamaki Makaurau
Mangere Community Law Centre
National Foundation for the Deaf
National Secretary on behalf of New Zealand Public Services Association
Niu Ola Trust
Parent and Family Resource Centre
People First
PHAB Pasifika
PSA Deaf and Disabled Members Network
Pukenga Consultancy
Regional Consumer Network
Rotorua District Community Law Centre
Royal New Zealand Foundation of the Blind
SAPOLU LAW
Service and Food Workers Union
Shine – safer homes in NZ everyday
Social Issues Community Team
Socialist Aotearoa
Southland Community Law Centre
Tamaki Ngati Kapo inc
Taranaki Community Law
Te Roopu Waiora Trust
The Asian Network Inc.
The Auckland Deaf Christian Fellowship
The Wilson Home Trust
Unite union
Vaka Tautua – Carmel Sepuloni CEO
Waitakere Community Law Centre
Working Women’s Resource Centre
Youthlaw

Posted in: Community Participation, Disability Issues, Human Rights and Legal Issues, News, Service-User Movement ⋅ Tagged: Auckland Disability Law, Minister for Disability Issues Tariana Turia, Minister of Justice Judith Collins, Save Disability Law, Update

No. 108: Hum

August 9, 2012 10:39 am ⋅ admin

This week, to attain, maintain or regain my sense of wellbeing...


...practice humming as a way to calm your nervous system and shift your mood. Hum simple, familiar tunes (lullabies are great for this) or just make humming sounds, mindfully focusing your attention on the vibration and the rhythm, to take a break from distressing thoughts and feelings, activate your parasympathetic nervous system and create a sense of calm and safety.

Humming is a way to slow our breathing without focusing on our breathing, which is great for people who start to feel like they can't breathe when they are paying attention to their breathing. Humming ensures a nice long out-breath, which gives our bodies calming bio-feedback and changes the CO2 concentration in our blood, which also has a calming effect. Humming slow, soothing kinds of songs like lullabies produces vestibular input through our inner ears and is a way of modulating our sensory input in a calming way too. Humming is a very simple action that does a lot!   

Once you are comfortable with this practice, add Hum to your Personal Coping Kete for times of stress and distress.

Posted in: Self-Soothing ⋅ Tagged: breathing exercises, mindfulness practice, Music Strategies

Engage Aotearoa Reviews Blueprint II

August 3, 2012 4:04 am ⋅ admin

Blueprint II was launched on the 13th of June and the mental-health sector has been largely silent in response. This is likely because Blueprint II is an epic 52-page document.

An Executive Summary on pages 6 and 7 of Blueprint II provides a summary of what goals need to be achieved, but does not outline how to achieve them. This leaves the reader with a lofty set of ideals and little practical perspective of what implementation involves.

In order to get the full picture of Blueprint II, one must read the entire document and it’s 102 page companion document. Notably, the assertions likely to make the most significant impact on service delivery are saved for the final chapter and the appendices of the companion document.

While Blueprint I set out to clearly define what was needed in the mental-health service sector and how to get there, Blueprint II makes calls for better, more effective services while supporting a drive for reduced funding and greater efficiency.

Oddly, the Blueprint II Companion Document makes the assertion that problems of inaccessible and under-resourced services have been resolved and that the future strategy should be focused on efficiency and productivity.

The document provides no evidence to back up this assertion that services have improved and can now focus on efficiency and cost-cutting. Presumably the authors have simply believed the marketing material of mental-health services without establishing whether their rhetoric is realised in action.

Blueprint II is a missed opportunity for the Mental Health Commission to influence government to increase the resources available to the mental-health sector and prevent further cuts to a sector that can ill afford them.

Staff at Engage Aotearoa have been supporting individuals currently residing in Auckland’s acute psychiatric wards across the previous two weeks and can confirm that although the Blueprint II authors state that services are now accessible, family-focused and person centred, this is not the case. Family members are currently left without information, nursing staff do not have time to talk to service-users, service-users are given extended periods of unsupervised leave without a single member of their family being informed, service-users have no access to the clinical psychologist on staff, even when specifically requested. There is clearly no room at the acute service for any form of budget cuts or loss of FTEs. Anecdotes from service users in the community suggest waiting times for a funded therapist can extend upwards of six months. In our community mental-health centres, only those in the top 3% of severity can be seen. At Engage Aotearoa we have heard stories about suicidal people seeking access to a key worker to keep themselves safe and being turned away. We have heard stories about service-users being discharged from their community mental-health centre over the phone without being reviewed due to demands on the service. Access to unfunded therapy is limited to those who can afford the fees.

A number of NZ newspapers recently ran a story about an unwell man who murdered his flatmate: while many people were worried about him in the days leading up to the incident, no one knew to call the Crisis Team or police to get him help. Everyone knows where they can buy an iPhone, but no one knows where to go when someone is a risk to themselves or others.

It seems clear that mental-health services in NZ continue to be under-resourced and difficult to access. Some of the most crucial services are so under-resourced that they cannot even make the public aware that they exist, let alone actually provide their service to all who need it.

Despite its push for better, more effective services, Blueprint II advocates reducing the number of services and making those services do more with less. An environment of competition for scarce resources pits services against each other at the same time that they are asked to work together in collaboration.

This is unlikely to result in positive changes for New Zealanders seeking improved wellbeing, the people they live with or the professionals who work to help them.

Posted in: Disability Issues, Engage Updates, Grants & Funding, Human Rights and Legal Issues, News, Online Resources, Politics and Policy, Service-User Movement, Social Change ⋅ Tagged: Blueprint II, Critique, Mental-Health Service Strategy, Review

Externals Issue 4 – The Newsletter from Ministry of Social Development

August 3, 2012 1:42 am ⋅ admin

EXTERNALS

Newsletter for health and disability professionals and organisations Issue 4 – July 2012

Introduction by the Principal Health and Disability Advisors

Externals has been created to keep you updated on news and events from across the Ministry of Social Development that relate to the Health and Disability sector.

Our aim with Externals is to cover the wide and diverse interests of the Health and Disability sector.

Externals is designed so your topic of special interest is easily found. If there are topics you’d like covered in our next issue, or you’d like to give us feedback, we’d like to hear from you.

Please contact the Principal Advisors:

* David at david.bratt001@msd.govt.nz or

* Anne at anne.hawker011@msd.govt.nz

Article index

* What does Work and Income currently fund?

* Disability Employment Innovation Fund

* Save time online at workandincome.govt.nz

* Future Focus – May 2011 Changes (Sickness benefit)

* Breaking the cycle of welfare dependency

* Productivity Allowance

* Consensus Statement on the Health Benefits of Work from The Australasian Faculty of Occupational & Environmental Medicine

* Changed process for monitored medical alarms paid through Disability Allowance

* Skylight’s 2012 professional development courses

* Apply online for NZ Superannuation

* Reminders

* Useful websites

* Feedback

What does Work and Income currently fund?

Work and Income currently funds a range of services designed to support people to (re)enter into employment or undertake training irrespective of benefit. Work and income also provide assistance specifically for people with ill health or a disability. Some of these are listed below .

Assistance generally available for main-benefit recipients

* Flexi Wage Subsidies – are payments to assist towards wages and skills training for employers and community groups.

* Job Search Service – supports people back to work as quickly as possible using either individualised or group job search activities.

* Work Experience – designed to help clients gain up-to-date work experience, explore whether a job or career could be suitable from them, and to develop informal contacts.

* Training Incentive Allowance – provides assistance to clients receiving certain types of benefits to undertake employment related training that will improve their skills and increase their chances of gaining employment.

* Course Participation Assistance – provides financial assistance towards the actual and reasonable costs for a client participating in short-term employment related training.

* Seasonal Work Assistance – provides financial assistance to workers who are unable to work (and lose income), due to poor weather conditions.

* Transition to Work Grant – is paid to help with essential costs in regards to job searching and work placement costs.

* Recoverable Assistance for Study – provides assistance to help sole parents receiving Domestic Purposes Benefit with study costs at level 4 or above on the National Qualifications Framework undertaking study towards being a doctor, nurse, midwife, vet or teacher.

* Flexi-Wage Plus Self Employment – helps clients to investigate or enter self-employment by providing training and advice. Can include both a subsidy and a grant to help clients overcome barriers associated with moving into self employment.

* Activity in the Community – aims to support clients through participation in community-based projects by offering opportunities to clients to gain voluntary unpaid experience in a community or voluntary organisation.

* Skills for Industry programmes – funds industry-related training in order to provide employers with employees who are specifically trained to their entry level requirements and to enable Work and Income clients to access and keep employment that becomes sustainable.

* Work Confidence – helps clients increase their motivation, confidence and job searching skills to move toward unsubsidised work or training.

Assistance available specifically for people with a disability or ill health

* Invalid’s Benefit Employment Trial – allows a client to work 15 hours or more in open employment for up to 6 months while retaining their invalid’s benefit.

* Employment Transition Assistance – is a non-taxable payment that is available for clients who have a reduced level of income after completing an employment trial.

* Employment Coordinator – works with clients who have a disability or ill health, to assist them with gaining and maintaining employment.

* Modification Grant – provides financial assistance for disabled people or people with ill health, so they can gain or retain employment.

* Job Support – are grants and subsidies which help cover the additional costs incurred due to participation in employment.

* Self Start – is a grant paid for support services that are needed when a person with ill health or a disability goes into self-employment.

* Training Support – is a grant which covers additional costs incurred through participation in training, work experience, education or capacity assessments.

* Mainstream – is a programme which provides a package of subsidies, training and other support to help people with significant disabilities get work in selected State and private sector organisations.

Disability Employment Innovation Fund

On 7 November 2011, Ministers Bennett and Turia announced the new Disability Employment Innovation Fund making $500,000 available for innovative ways of getting disabled people into work or retaining them in work. As the Ministers stated in their announcement, “A priority … is to get people into work. This fund supports disabled people into work and also supports employers to retain disabled workers.”

The Ministers set the expectations that the outcomes would inform the welfare reform work.

The fund was targeted to three areas:

* Innovative projects from employers to retain current employees in employment who either have an existing disability or who have acquired a disability including chronic health condition or mental health condition.

* Innovative projects from employers to get disabled people into employment.

* Innovative projects from the NGO sector or disabled people organisations to support disabled people into self employment.

Sixty seven applications were received. The applications were assessed by a panel comprising Work and Income; MSD Policy; Employment Disability Forum and Employers’ Disability Network.

Seventeen applications were successful. For more information see:

http://www.odi.govt.nz/

http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/about-work-and-income/news/2012/disability-employment-innovation-fund-successful-applicants.html

Save Time Online at workandincome.govt.nz: How to use WINZ online services

Use the self service kiosks in our office if you don’t have access to a computer.
You can search for work
You can search through thousands of job vacancies on Find a Job. It’s as easy as entering a job title and where you want to work. If you find a job you’d like, call us.
You can check what you might be eligible for You can check the types of financial assistance you may be eligible for by answering a series of questions. This is a research tool only and you can’t apply for any financial assistance here.
You can apply for financial assistance
You can complete and submit your online application form. You’ll need to create a username and password before you begin. This tool will also help you determine what type of financial assistance you may be entitled to.
You don’t have to complete your application form in one sitting. You can save your application, then log out. When you come back, you’ll be taken to your last saved page. Partially completed applications will be saved for 60 days.

Before you begin, you’ll need the following information at hand. If you have a partner, they’ll also need to answer some questions and have this information handy:

* IRD number (contact Inland Revenue if you don’t have it)

* bank account numbers

* last pay slip (this will show your holiday pay)

* income details for the last 52 weeks

* details of your housing costs

* details of any assets you own which could earn income

* details of any debts that you have (including hire purchases).

If you need help with your online application you can contact 0800 559 009 – please say “Online help” when you are asked to say why you are calling. Or you can email us at: OnlineSupport@WorkandIncome.govt.nz

For further details on the online services http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/online-services/

For further details on line application process – http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/online-services/the-application-process.html

Future Focus – May 2011 Changes (Sickness benefit)

1. How does the sanction process work and how will it be applied for SB clients?

The Future Focus package is about helping people on benefits get back into work as quickly as possible. We believe that paid work is the best route to independence and well being for most people because it increases self esteem, provides financial independence and gives our children positive role models.

People on benefits that have work obligations won’t be penalised for not getting a job, but they may have their benefit reduced or suspended if they’re not actively looking for one. Work obligations mean they must be available for and take reasonable steps to find suitable work.

For more information about sanctions go to: http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/about-work-and-income/news/future-focus-2010/sanctions.html

2. What assistance is there for employers taking on clients with part-time capacity and health and disability barriers?

Work and Income helps clients move into jobs that are the right fit for their competencies and career choices.

From 2 May 2011 we will be working closely with a targeted group of Sickness Benefit clients to identify suitable employment opportunities for their circumstances and support them to move towards getting a job.

Work and Income also provides a range of assistance designed to support clients to (re)enter into employment or undertake training, and support employers taking on our clients.

Some examples include:

* Flexi Wage Subsidies – Wage subsidies are payments to assist towards wages and skills training for employers and community groups.

* Modification Grant – Modification grants can be paid to the employer or the employee to remove physical barriers to work.

* Skills for industry programmes – These programmes are available for all benefit types including disabled people and people with ill health on Sickness Benefits.

3. What assistance is available to help clients with paying fees for getting a medical certificate completed?

Clients are required to pay for their medical certificates. In the early stages of a medical condition most clients will already be consulting their GP regularly, so that the number of truly additional visits should not be significant.

It is not unreasonable to expect a person to see their doctor twice in the first eight weeks of benefit receipt. More frequent assessment is likely to reduce benefit dependency at the early stages of illness or disability when people are usually closer to the labour market. The longer people are on benefits, the more likely they are to lose the confidence they need to participate in work.

If the client’s medical condition is likely to last at least six months, they may be eligible for a Disability Allowance (DA). If the client qualifies for Disability Allowance, the costs of medical assessments can be included.

Disability Assistance brochure is at:

http://www.workandincome.govt.nz/individuals/forms-and-brochures/disability-assistance-guide.html

4. Will people on SB be better off taking a low paid job for part-time hours? (Abatement and Better-off calculators, etc)

Yes. Paid work has been shown to increase people’s well being and aid recovery from illness or injury. There is strong evidence to show that work minimises the harmful physical, mental and social effects of being out of work for a long time through sickness.

Abatement Factsheet is at:

http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/newsroom/factsheets/future-focus/abatement.html

Breaking the cycle of welfare dependency

As part of the Government’s commitment to transforming the benefit system, promoting self reliance and recognising people’s work potential, changes are proposed for introduction at the end of July to support young people at risk of long term welfare dependency.

The new Youth Service will support 16 and 17-year-olds not in education, training or work, as well as 16 to 17 year olds and young parents up to 18 years old who need financial support. It will offer hands-on guidance and financial support for young people who are on a benefit or at risk of coming onto a benefit.

Youth Service is about stepping in early and targeting support to help young people gain the skills they need to be independent.

Young people who need financial support

Over half the young people who first enter the benefit system at 16 or 17 years old spend at least five of the next 10 years on a benefit. The new service will mean these young people will:

* Be helped by contracted Youth Service providers into education, training or work-based learning.

* Have assistance with managing money through budgeting assistance, and a new form of payment where essential costs such as rent and power can be paid directly. The young person will receive an in-hand allowance of up to $50 and the remainder will be loaded onto a payment card for groceries.

* Young people can receive a $10 a week incentive if they regularly attend classes and a budgeting course. A similar incentive is offered for young parents who attend parenting courses.

* A Guaranteed Childcare Assistance Payment will mean that childcare costs will not stop young parents in this age group from studying.

Young people not in work, education or training

* Youth Service providers will work with 16 to 17 year olds to help them into education, training or work-based learning.

* The Ministries of Education and Social Development will share information to help identify school leavers most at risk of coming on to a benefit, so that Youth Service providers can step in early with the right support.

Productivity Allowance

What is Productivity Allowance?

The Productivity Allowance is a wage subsidy paid to an employer. Workbridge administers this subsidy on behalf of the Ministry of Social Development.

The subsidy is paid to assist the employer while the employee gains skills and establishes the types of supports available to any employee starting a new job. Like other new employees, disabled people increase their productivity the longer they are in employment. The subsidy recognises the additional support the disabled person requires over and above the support that would be offered to any other employee. The outcome of the subsidy is the creation of an inclusive and sustainable employment environment for the disabled person.

The job can be full-time or part-time. It must be open employment and meet the minimum terms and conditions of employment (such as minimum wage), and not be receiving government funding for the same activity.

Why do all Productivity Allowances have a fading plan?

All Productivity Allowances have a ‘fade out’ plan whereby the subsidy reduces 5% every six months. The maximum period for this subsidy is 52 weeks at which time the employee will need to reapply. Any subsequent Productivity Allowance continues with the fade out plan.

Fade out plans are put in place to ensure a continuous flow of funds are available for other disabled people entering the workforce or new jobs. The subsidy is at its highest when the disabled employee will require the most assistance and support, but fades as the person becomes more established in their job.

If you would like to find out more about Productivity Allowances contact your local Workbridge Centre Manager:

www.workbridge.co.nz

Call free 0508 858 858

Consensus Statement on the Health Benefits of Work from The Australasian Faculty of Occupational & Environmental Medicine

At the heart of this consensus statement regarding the health benefits of work is a shared desire to improve the welfare of individuals, families and communities. Realising the health benefits of work for all Australians requires a paradigm shift in thinking and practice. It necessitates cooperation between many stakeholders, including government, employers, unions, insurance companies, legal practitioners, advocacy groups, and the medical, nursing and allied health professions. We, the undersigned, commit to working together to encourage and enable Australians to achieve the health and wellbeing benefits of work. We acknowledge the following fundamental principles about the relationship between health and work.

For more information http://www.racp.edu.au/index.cfm?objectid=57063EA7-0A13-1AB6-E0CA75D0CB353BA8

Changed process for monitored medical alarms paid through Disability Allowance

The Ministry of Social Development has introduced a new accreditation process for suppliers of medical alarms to over 51,000 clients who have the cost of their monitored medical alarm paid through Disability Allowance.

What are the changes?

* The cost of providing monitored medical alarm services paid through the Disability Allowance has gone down.

* Medical alarm suppliers have new high quality service standards to meet.

* From 1 March 2012 only companies which have met the new standards and provide value for money are allowed to be ‘accredited’ medical alarm suppliers.

The nine accredited medical alarm suppliers are: (in alphabetical order):

* ADT Armourguard (incorporating Signature Security, Eldersafe, HomeGuard, Safe Secure, Careguard, Radius Heal)

* BUPA Care Services Ltd (incorporating Guardians, Guardians Help Phone)

* Chubb Medical

* Freedom Medical Alarms (incorporating Freedom Medical Alarms Christchurch, Masterton South Rotary Club (Alarms), Abel Assist)

* Kiwi Concern (NZ) Ltd (incorporating 3C Personal Alarms, Constantly Secure Medical Alarms, AlphaCare Medical Alarms, Help Phone North)

* Safe Link Ltd (incorporating Help Phone Wellington)

* Senior Care Ltd

* St John (incorporating Procare, Safe House)

* Tunstall Lifecare.

Further information is on the Ministry’s website at http://www.msd.govt.nz/about-msd-and-our-work/work-programmes/medical-alarms/medical-alarms-landing-page.html

Skylight’s 2012 professional development courses

Skylight’s professional development courses cover a broad cross section of issues relating to the impact of change, loss, trauma and grief on children, young people, adults and their families, friends and community. Skylight facilitators work with individuals and organisations to provide workshops and training modules to suit their specific needs. Training can be arranged at whatever venue works best for you.

In 2012, Skylight’s training programme will run two series for people working with children and young people; ‘Talking to Kids About…’ and ‘Talking to Teens About…’. Topics for these workshops include ‘Eating Disorders’, ‘Addictions’, ‘Anger’, and ‘Risky Behaviour’. These workshops are of particular value to health professionals, family and community support workers. For more information, please contact:

* Linda Karlin, Manager Counselling & Training 04 9396760 or lindal@skylight-trust.org.nz

* Aileen Davidson, Training Coordinator 04 9396767 or aileen@skylight-trust.org.nz

Apply online for NZ Superannuation

Turning 65? People can now apply online for NZ Superannuation. Feedback from applicants about the application has been positive. They tell us it gives them more choice and control over how they apply for NZ Superannuation and makes the process easier for them.

Apply online on the Senior Services website: www.seniors.msd.govt.nz

Reminders

Visit the Senior Services website

If seniors need information about entitlements, support or how to get in touch with us visit the seniors website: www.seniors.msd.govt.nz Ask a Question on the Senior Services website If older people have questions and need answers they can use our Ask a Question tool on our website: www.seniors.msd.govt.nz The quickest way to get an answer to your question is to search our Find Answers page.

Email updates

People can now receive seniors-related information from us by emailing the following details to us at: seniors@msd.govt.nz

* Name and Address

* Client number (found on the back of the SuperGold card)

* Email address.

Useful websites

Ministry of Social Development www.msd.govt.nz

Work and Income www.workandincome.govt.nz

Senior Services www.seniors.msd.govt.nz

StudyLink www.studylink.govt.nz

Child, Youth and Family www.cyf.govt.nz

Office for Senior Citizens www.osc.govt.nz

Office for Disability Issues www.odi.govt.nz

Feedback

Remember, we welcome your suggestions and ideas. Did you find the newsletter useful, what can be done to make it more useful, and what worked or didn’t work? Please send any feedback to Anne at anne.hawker011@msd.govt.nz or David at david.bratt001@msd.govt.nz

Posted in: Grants & Funding ⋅ Tagged: Benefit Changes, Externals, Health and Disability Advisors, Health and Disability Sector, Invalids Benefit, Issue 4, July 2012, Ministry of Social Development, Sickness Benefit, WINZ

No. 107: Think of the Safer Alternatives

July 28, 2012 11:29 am ⋅ Leave a Comment ⋅ admin

This week, to attain, maintain or regain my sense of wellbeing… Coping Kete

…I will practice harm minimisation as a way of responding to distress. As I move through my week, when I notice small changes in my mood or any self-destructive urges, I will practice thinking of the safest way of responding to the way I feel. Where I might sometimes have the urge to do something to hurt myself to express the way I feel, this week, I will practice thinking about the less harmful alternatives. When I notice my thinking or feelings heading in a self-destructive direction, I will ask myself “what would be the safest way of responding to this?” For example, if I notice myself thinking about cutting myself to relieve my distress, I will think about some less harmful things that might give me the same release. In this way, I will nurture my wellbeing and treat myself with a bit more respect and kindness. Using intense, but safe sensations is often really helpful. Some people find that holding a piece of ice or running a piece of sharp ice over their skin gives them an intense almost painful sensation that can replace the need to cut. Other people find snapping a rubber band on their wrist does the same thing. Yet other people find that running a red felt-tip pen over their arm gives them an intense visual picture that replaces the need to self-harm. Some people find them all helpful at different times. This week I will practice imagining doing these kinds of things rather than thinking about hurting myself. This week, I will practice thinking about doing these kinds of things whenever I notice myself thinking about hurting myself. Once I have gotten used to thinking about these safer alternative ways of reacting to my distress, I will add ‘ Think of a Safer Alternative’ and the strategies I thought of to my Personal Coping Kete as a way of responding when I feel the urge to hurt myself.

Posted in: Mindful Distraction, Self-Soothing ⋅ Tagged: Coping, self-care, Stress Management

Coalition for an Ethical Psychology Sends Message to the American Psychological Association

July 28, 2012 12:21 am ⋅ admin

Earlier today the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology sent the message below to all members of the Board and Council of the American Psychological Association, as well as to several hundred leaders of APA’s many divisions. The APA’s Annual Convention is next week in Orlando, Florida, and we are hoping that annulment of the PENS Report will be a significant topic of discussion there. The documents mentioned below are not attached to this email, but they are accessible through the hyperlinks provided. Again, we greatly appreciate your support. Thank you!

Sincerely,
Roy Eidelson, on behalf of the Coalition

July 26, 2012

Dear Members of the APA Board and Council of Representatives:

As members of the Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, we appeal to you, in advance of your upcoming meetings in Orlando, to take an historic stand for psychological ethics against continued participation of psychologists in harsh military and intelligence operations. With this stand the American Psychological Association can reassert its ethical leadership in international and scientific psychology.

Based upon our campaign to annul the PENS (Psychological Ethics and National Security) Report, we have developed the attached “A Resolution to Annul the APA PENS Report” (www.ethicalpsychology.org/pens/A-Resolution-to-Annul-the-APA-PENS-Report.pdf). It presents the compelling and urgent case for annulment, in the form of a formal resolution for Council consideration. Undeniably, there are powerful financial, institutional, and ideological forces aligned against the effort to establish a firm ethics-based foundation for psychology in national security settings. But we are hoping there is at least one member on Council willing to introduce this Resolution as a New Business item at next week’s Council meeting.

Our Call for Annulment of the APA’s PENS Report has received the support of a truly grassroots movement. Nearly three-dozen organizations (representing tens of thousands of people) and over 2,000 individuals have endorsed the Coalition’s annulment petition. The second attached document (72 pages), titled “Supporters of PENS Annulment,” provides a complete list of endorsers to date (www.ethicalpsychology.org/pens/Supporters-of-PENS-Annulment.pdf). In addition to groups respected nationally and internationally, you will also see many familiar names among the individual petition signers, including current and past leaders of the APA who have served the Association long and well. They too believe it is long past time for APA to annul PENS.

Finally, the third attached document is titled “Adversarial Operational Psychology Is Unethical for Psychologists” (www.ethicalpsychology.org/pens/Adversarial-Operational-Psychology-Is-Unethical-for-Psychologists.pdf). In this brief paper – based in part on consultation with veteran military and intelligence professionals who have worked with psychologists – we introduce the ethical case against what we refer to as “adversarial operational psychology.” It is our strong conviction that this particular form of operational psychology, which includes psychologist involvement in the interrogation of national security detainees, is inconsistent with the core ethics of our profession.

We are very interested in your views and we welcome dialogue. We believe that annulling the PENS Report will open up the space for constructive engagement about these issues. At that point, we believe it is essential that there be a broad-based, independent, and transparent discussion examining the relationship between psychological ethics and operational psychology. This is precisely what did not happen in 2005, when the PENS Task Force acted instead to rubber-stamp the policies of the U.S. military and intelligence agencies in regard to acceptable roles and activities for psychologists in their operations. The discussion we have in mind must not be held under APA auspices and must extend beyond APA members to other major stakeholders, including non-APA-member and international psychologists, human rights advocates, military intelligence professionals and military ethicists, Guantánamo habeas attorneys, and released detainees.

Thank you in advance for the time and consideration given to the three attached documents. Please share your reactions with us. And please step forward at your Board and Council meetings next week to introduce and support the Resolution to Annul the PENS Report.

Sincerely,

Roy Eidelson
Jean Maria Arrigo
Trudy Bond
Brad Olson
Steven Reisner
Stephen Soldz
Bryant Welch

A Resolution to Annul the APA’s PENS Report

That Council annul the American Psychological Association’s (APA’s) 2005 Presidential Report on Psychological Ethics and National Security (the “PENS Report”).[i]

WHEREAS reports circulated as early as 2004 that psychologists acted as planners, consultants, researchers, and overseers to abusive and sometimes torturous interrogations at Guantánamo Bay Detention Center, Bagram Air Base, and CIA “black sites”;[ii]

WHEREAS the PENS Task Force ignored the Board mandate to inquire into the specific public reports of psychologist involvement in abusive interrogations at Guantánamo, the CIA’s secret prisons, and elsewhere, in spite of the fact that the Task Force contained several members with direct knowledge of the torture and other abusive interrogations conducted or aided by psychologists;[iii]

WHEREAS the PENS Report nevertheless endorsed psychologists’ involvement in interrogations of national security detainees as a means to ensure that they are safe, legal, ethical, and effective;

WHEREAS six of the nine voting members of the PENS Task Force were on the payroll of the U.S. military and/or intelligence agencies, and several of them were drawn from chains of command accused of abuses under the purview of Task Force ethical guidance;[iv]

WHEREAS the military members of the PENS Task Force required as a condition of their participation that the PENS Report be framed within U.S. law rather than international human rights law, even though APA is an accredited NGO to the United Nations;[v]

WHEREAS senior representatives from the APA Ethics Office, Public Affairs Office, Science Directorate, and Practice Directorate were undisclosed participants in the weekend PENS Task Force meeting;

WHEREAS some of these representatives engaged in high-level lobbying for Department of Defense (DoD) funding and had a vested interest in a PENS Report compatible with then current DoD policy;[vi]

WHEREAS a significant conflict of interest existed for the Director of the APA Practice Directorate (who played a dominant role during the Task Force meetings) because his wife was an active duty, SERE-trained psychologist who served at Guantanamo; she was also responsible in part for developing the practice and training models for psychologists involved in detainee interrogations at Guantanamo;[vii]

WHEREAS the employment status of several Task Force members and others in attendance required or encouraged them to support psychologist participation in national security interrogations and to accommodate the Bush Administration’s permissive legal definition of torture rather than the stricter definition of torture in international human rights law;[viii]

WHEREAS the Task Force and unacknowledged participants presumed, without introducing evidence, the military necessity of psychologist involvement in interrogation and detainee operations;

WHEREAS the PENS Task Force presumed that the current APA Ethics Code adequately addressed complex ethical issues associated with psychologist involvement in national security operations, that no new ethical standards were needed, and that national security concerns justified subordinating individual interests to government interests;

WHEREAS the PENS Task Force declined to consider the challenges in adapting the APA Ethics Code to operational psychologists working under military authority and military exigencies, including the difficulty or impossiblity of ethical monitoring of actions and of obtaining independent consultation in classified settings;

WHEREAS there was little or no consultation with psychologists from other specialties that would be affected by, and concerned about, the policy, and no subsequent period was provided for member feedback;

WHEREAS the PENS Task Force Chair designated two non-members of the Task Force – the Directors of the Ethics Office and the Office of Public Affairs – as the sole spokespersons for the Task Force, and a highly unusual confidentiality agreement bound the Task Force members from discussing the process or the Report with others;

WHEREAS official APA acceptance of the PENS Report departed from standard APA procedures in the following ways: the director of its Ethics Office was appointed as “rapporteur” and he produced the full draft report at the close of the two-and-a-half-day meeting; the Task Force members were given 24 hours to accept or reject the report; the APA Board of Directors invoked its emergency powers to endorse the PENS Report, preempting a standard review and vote by the Council of Representatives; and approval was not sought from the Policy and Planning Board, the Board of Professional Affairs, or the Board for Advancement of Psychology in the Public Interest;[ix]

WHEREAS the identities of the PENS Task Force members were not included in the Report, were not posted on the APA’s website, and were withheld from members of the APA and members of the press requesting them;[x]

WHEREAS these processes were far outside the norms of transparency, independence, and deliberation for similar task forces established by the APA and by other professional associations;

WHEREAS two voting members of the Task Force not employed by national security agencies, upon further reflection after the pressured weekend meeting, rejected the PENS Report and called for its annulment, with one resigning from the Task Force in protest;

WHEREAS the PENS Report has been cited routinely in Behavioral Science Consultant policy memos as supporting psychologists’ involvement in detention, interrogation, and debriefing operations, including in the assessment and exploitation of individual detainee “vulnerabilities” for intelligence purposes;[xi]

WHEREAS the PENS Report is being used to support the promotion of “operational psychology” – which includes applications of psychology to direct harm to those identified as potential adversaries – as an official area of specialization for psychologists;[xii]

WHEREAS the PENS Report is repeatedly cited as a resource for ethical decision-making in the APA Ethics Committee’s recent “casebook” on National Security Commentary;[xiii]

WHEREAS the PENS Report has contributed to significant harm to vulnerable populations by supporting policies that permit abusive treatment; has badly damaged the reputation of the profession of psychology; has diminished the APA’s commitment to advance psychology “as a means of promoting health, education and human welfare;” has compromised the integrity of the relationship between professional psychology and the security sector; and, according to some senior interrogators and intelligence professionals, has undermined national security;

WHEREAS the PENS Task Force meeting was purported to be the one forum where the ethics of psychologist involvement in problematic national security activities were discussed and resolved, yet Task Force members failed to engage in any substantive dialogue about psychological ethics and national security;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the APA’s Report of the Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS Report) is hereby annulled.

July 26, 2012

References:

[i] The PENS Report is available on the APA website at http://www.apa.org/pubs/info/reports/pens.pdf.

[ii] For example, see Neil Lewis’s New York Times article, “Red Cross finds detainee abuse at Guantanamo” (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/30/politics/30gitmo.html), published 11/30/2204, and the New England Journal of Medicine article “When Doctors Go to War” by M. Gregg Bloche and Jonathan Marks, published 1/6/2005. Among the many subsequent informative accounts are Jane Mayer’s 7/11/2005 New Yorker essay “The Experiment: The military trains people to withstand interrogation. Are those methods being misused at Guantanamo?” (http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2005/07/11/050711fa_fact4); her 2008 book The Dark Side: The Inside Story of How The War on Terror Turned into a War on American Ideals (Doubleday); and Katherine Eban’s 7/17/2007Vanity Fair article “Rorschach and Awe” (http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2007/07/torture200707).

[iii] The Agenda Item presented to the APA Board at its February 2005 meeting called for the proposed PENS Task Force to address the following issues:

What appropriate limits does the principle “Do no harm” place on psychologists’ involvement in investigations related to national security?
To the extent it can be determined, given the classified nature of many of these activities: What roles are psychologists asked to take in investigations related to national security?
What are criteria to differentiate ethically appropriate from ethically inappropriate roles that psychologists may take?
How is psychology likely to be used in investigations related to national security?
What role does informed consent have in investigations related to national security?
What does current research tell us about the efficacy and effectiveness of various investigative techniques?
Would the efficacy and effectiveness of various investigative techniques, if demonstrated, affect our ethics?
Has APA responded strongly enough to media accounts of activities that have occurred at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay?

Note: To review the entire document, see American Psychological Association Board of Directors. (2005, February 16 & 17). Agenda item 3: Task force to explore the ethical aspects of psychologists’ Involvement and the use of psychology in national security-related investigations: Request for board discretionary funds. In J. M. Arrigo, Unoffical records of the APA PENS Task Force, Hoover Institution Archives, Stanford University, Stanford, CA.

[iv] Biosketches of the Task Force members are available on an earlier version of the Division 48 website: http://www.clarku.edu/peacepsychology/tfpens.html. Among the locations where several of them worked are the Guantanamo Detention Center in Cuba, the Bagram Airbase in Afghanistan, and at least one CIA “black site.” For further background on the Task Force, see Mark Benjamin’s July 2006 essay in Salon titled “Psychological Warfare” (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/07/26/interrogation).

[v] More detailed information on the stances of the individual Task Force members and others involved in the meetings can be obtained by reviewing the publicly available compilation of emails from the Task Force listserv: http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/pens_listserv.pdf. For example, APA President-Elect Gerry Koocher wrote, “I have zero interest in entangling APA with the nebulous, toothless, contradictory, and obfuscatory treaties that comprise “international law.” Rather, I prefer to see APA take principled stands on policy issuesd where psychology has some scientific basis for doing so” (p. 160). The PENS Report itself states the following in regard to the role of human rights standards in an ethics code: “While all Task Force members felt that respect for human rights is critical, some task force members felt strongly that international standards of human rights should be built into the ethics code and others felt that the laws of the United States should be the touchstone” (p. 9).

[vi] For example, the October 2004 issue of the APA’s Science Policy Insider News (SPIN) notes that staffers Geoff Mumford and Heather Kelly, both of whom subsequently attended the meetings of the PENS Task Force, met with high-ranking DoD psychologists, including Task Force member Scott Shumate, to discuss possible areas of collaboration (http://www.apa.org/about/gr/science/spin/2004/10/also-issue.aspx).

[vii] See page 5 of this report prepared for the U.S. Army Medical Research and Materiel Command, in which LTC Debra Dunivin (the aforementioned psychologist) is listed as Principle Investigator: “The overriding issue centers around the deployment of the project’s principle investigator Dr. Debra Dunivin, to Task Force GTMO in Cuba shortly after the mid-term report was submitted in April 2004” (http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf&AD=ADA436945). Also, see page 167 of the PENS Task Force listserv, in which on 8/12/2005 COL Louie M. Banks writes: “Last Friday, I spent eight hours with the Army’s Surgeon General, LTG Kiley, along with Larry James, Debra Dunivin, and several others. We were trying to establish the doctrinal guidelines and training model for psychologists performing this job. The TF report provided, again, a solid anchor to use in our deliberations” (http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/pens_listserv.pdf).

[viii] See discussion of this and related issues throughout the PENS Task Force listserv (http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/pens_listserv.pdf). For example, R. Scott Shumate wrote: “I hope I can speak for my colleagues in the Department of Defense that we embrace the discussions and various viewpoints that will be represented at the table during the next four days. I look forward to sorting out the ethical guidance that we will recommend to the APA while also being vigilant that we are not there to debate nor confront the past, present nor future policies of the Administration or the Department. I believe that we can do what is right for psychology while holding reserve on those aspects that we have neither the authority nor the charge to address” (p. 85).

[ix] The PENS Report was publicly released on July 5, 2005, prior to the August Council of Representatives meeting and less than one week after the Board met in emergency session (http://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2005/07/pens.aspx). That Council did not vote to approve the PENS Report is explicitly confirmed by this “Correction” in the May 2006 Monitor on Psychology(http://www.apa.org/monitor/may06/correction.aspx): “It was [previously] written that the Presidential Task Force on Psychological Ethics and National Security (PENS) report ‘was accepted by APA’s Council of Representatives.’ Council did not accept the report, as in early July 2005, the Board of Directors invoked emergency action on council’s behalf to adopt the PENS Report as APA policy.”

[x] See Mark Benjamin’s August 2006 Salon article “Psychologists Group Still Rocked by Torture Debate” (http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2006/08/04/apa), which includes the following: “But a link to the biographies of those task force members appeared on the APA Web site only after the publication of Salon’s article. Farberman acknowledged that the APA did put the link to the bios of the task force members on its site after Salon published its story.” Benjamin was able to publish the names only after obtaining them from Congressional sources. Also, on the PENS Task Force listserv (http://s3.amazonaws.com/propublica/assets/docs/pens_listserv.pdf), Task Force member Michael Gelles wrote this in regard to the actions of Stephen Behnke, director of APA’s Ethics Office, at the August APA Convention that year: “I was once again impressed with how Dr. Behnke eloquently represented our work and insured the confidentiality of the panel, despite pressure to reveal the identities of the task force members and the process that unfolded during the Task Force meetings” (p. 169).

[xi] For example, the PENS Report is included as an enclosure/appendix to OTSG/MEDCOM Policy Memo 09-053 on detainee interrogations from the office of the Army Surgeon General, titled “Behavioral Science Consultation Policy” (https://www.qmo.amedd.army.mil/credentialing/09_053.pdf).

[xii] The “Twelve Guiding Statements” of the PENS Report are presented as the foundational ethics document for operational psychology in the appendix of Ethical Practice in Operational Psychology: Military and National Intelligence Applications, edited by Carrie H. Kennedy and Thomas J. Williams (2011; Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press).

[xiii] This “casebook” is currently available online at http://www.apa.org/ethics/programs/national-security-comments.pdf.

Forward this message on and help spread the word.

Posted in: Community Participation, Human Rights and Legal Issues, News, Politics and Policy, Social Change ⋅ Tagged: Adverserial Operational Psychology, Coalition for an Ethical Psychology, Council and Board of the American Psychogical Association, Ethics, PENS Report, Presidential report Psychological Ethics and National Security

RCNet Update Online

July 25, 2012 8:48 am ⋅ admin

Check out the latest update from Auckland Regional Consumer Network online here

http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=0ae19a33aecbccc00bd1fbf5e&id=6dd9319999&e=32c28f31d5

Posted in: Service-User Movement ⋅ Tagged: RCNet Update

Last Day to make a submission on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill!!

July 25, 2012 8:41 am ⋅ admin

Local Government Bill update:

One of the main concerns was that the Bill proposes to remove the “four well-beings” (cultural, economic, social and environmental), and narrow the scope of local government’s ability to address community and social outcomes.

Please find below notes from a briefing, based on the report from officers for the Auckland Plan Committee. This briefing will provide you with information about Auckland Council’s thinking about the proposed changes to the purpose of local government. Please note that the Auckland Plan Committee voted to oppose the proposed purpose statement which removes the requirement to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities.

Making a submission:

As organisations/or individuals you may want to make a submission in your own capacity.

For more information about the Bill, procedure of making a submission, and to make a submission on-line (see the button at the bottom of the page to make an online submission), http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/SC/MakeSub/4/d/f/49SCLGE_SCF_00DBHOH_BILL9872_1-Local-Government-Act-2002-Amendment.htm

There is also guidance about making a submission to a Select Committee:

http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/ACB8A16D-D905-416C-AE98-A6BFB07E34B5/163597/makingasubmission2010_1.pdf

Please note that submissions on the Bill close 26 July 2012

Posted in: Community Participation, Human Rights and Legal Issues, News ⋅ Tagged: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill

« Previous 1 … 41 42 43 44 45 … 68 Next »