Stopping the WOLVES in disabilities...screening workers? Is it happening...
I had to let a support worker go who would not work in with using a kiddilock on a car door to stop the door being opened by my son which is now considered a reasonable safety measure this then became an argument as his car had no safety lock and the whole situation didn’t feel right, there are so many wolves in disabilities services dressed as sheep. I decided to finish with that worker and had to find more support help. When I went to my usual agency for hiring a new worker for James, a man approached on the hire website, who said he used to work at Sunnyfields.
It made my blood run cold as I have just written about the support nasty workers that hurt two disabilities people at Sunnyfields and were sacked but not prosecuted through lack of camera evidence - so there’s nothing to show they were those who harmed those poor nonverbal people in their care. Even with eyewitness statements by other workers, so brave, who saw the incidents the Magistrate still dropped the charges! Where is the justice in that?
I assumed the assaulters on the non verbal persons at Sunnyfields house were both men as the Royal Commission report said “he…” in their investigations of the Sunnyfields house incidents. This person looking for work in disabilities, s a man who approached me on the internet of the agency and said his previous experience was at Sunnyfields and he would love to work with my son. I bet. The Royal Commission report on Sunnyfields house, said the CEO called the worker who hurt the two persons at the accommodation house a conman. He and another were sacked for hurting the two vulnerable disability persons at sunnyfields. Now I believe he is one of these on the agency website. I could though be wrong he might be another worker who left Sunnyfields! How do parents know? We need a register of those who have allegedly hurt children and adult children in disabilities. These are the wolves prowling through disabilities services and they should not be!
When the worker approached me online, he said he would love to work with James and then I saw he had worked at Sunnyfields I thought well that’s a con to start with. Of course he would say that. This man could possibly be one of those who punched the blind autistic no verbal boy and dragged him out of the wheelchair as outlined in the article I have quoted. Or he could be the other worker who dragged the poor girl naked through the disabilities house. What care? What privacy? They wouldn’t put cameras in Sunnyfields due to the claimed need for privacy of the workers!!! What about the protection of those vulnerable who cannot speak up for themselves?
The workers who were sacked from their jobs at Sunnyfields are now wandering around trying to get more work with vulnerable disabilities people! There should be a register of those who have been involved in assaults or abuse of those in disabilities they have supposed to be caring for. Because the charges were dropped by the magistrate and there were no convictions there is no record in disabilities to show these criminals are trying to work with our precious children in disabilities and usually it is the most vulnerable who need one on one workers. WE must protect those in disabilities and we need the cameras to get that conviction and proof for prosecution of those who hurt the vulnerable in disabilities. The names of those who have abused, neglected or assaulted those they cared for in disabilities should also be put on a list for disabilities agencies to see who is dangerous just as happens in childcare and schools. These people should be blacklisted. It is a crime to hurt those who are vulnerable, to assault them or neglect them is a crime but needs to be specifically made a crime by the law for disabilities.
A woman told me how when she experienced domestic violence the police were so good…but years ago that wouldn’t be so because it was not a crime unless the charges were pressed by the victim women their wives etc I said the police were no good regarding those hurt in disabilities she said oh that’s because of their orders from the top. I thought then what if the police had not listened to you when you were attacked by your husband would you have said oh that’s because of orders from the top. No I think you would have been extremely upset that they didn’t listen to you or help you or prosecute that person that hurt you. Why should perpetrators get away with it in disabilities? Just because society don’t think it matters but if it was you or your child it would matter. The law should give equal justice to those with disabilities. Its unfair and unjust to say the vulnerable can be attacked without any consequences for the attackers who cannot defend themselves because they have disabilities and no voice. It took a long time for women to get justice from violence done against them only through fighting for their rights could they change the laws, only if we parents fight for our children’s rights and their need for stronger laws can we change things. We cannot let them just be hurt with no prosecutions for the offenders in disabilities, its just wrong.
With no cctv cameras at Sunnyfields these men could not be charged or prosecuted due to lack of evidence and so what do the disability houses do? Make sure there are no cameras so they continue to let any violence happen, any crimes of assault or abuse and will not have the trouble of court action against them. Caring more about their reputation than those who money they take for their substandard services. Despicable.
Noted on Paragraphs 391 to 393 of the Royal Commission inquiry into Sunnyfields, one of the parents Sophia had asked the organization to install cameras at Sunnyfields house as she was worried about her very vulnerable son and requested they be installed for the clients safety “On 10 April 2017, Eliza emailed the Sunnyfield Client Engagement Manager, copying the other families, saying ‘can you please do something up about the installation and operation/review of CCTV for the house? It was a big ticket item on our initial meetings and we will need to have a section in the agreement on it.’
391. The Client Engagement Manager recalled the issue of CCTV being raised in by the house families when Sunnyfield made an initial presentation to them, and suggested they say ‘we have since spoken to HR
and found that we cannot due to staff privacy’. The Regional Manager then raised a concern about the potential impact of CCTV on recruitment of staff for the house and Dr Clayton responded to say he would discuss the matter with HR. Ms Cuddihy did not recall having any involvement in this discussion.
It looks as though the staff’s feelings were more important than the clients’ protection who had no way then of being safe.
The CEO Ms Cuddihy, at the Royal Commissions inquiry, again said they had sought legal advice and would not be getting CCTV cameras. How very pointedly selfish and neglectful are these providers who show they do not care for our disabilities children by not even installing CCTV to protect them! Because they did not in the first place get those cameras those poor nonverbal children were assaulted badly and there was no penalty for the workers who did it. They knew they could get away with it and they did. They should be in prison or have some kind of penalties on their lives. This shows a government and justice system who do not value those most weakest and at peril in society. Parents need to get together and push for cameras in school and disabilities houses and respite. We must not leave this or more will be harmed in schools and in day programs and accommodation where our children and adult children live at risk especially when we are no longer here to protect them.
391. On 12 April 2017, when Eliza returned the signed service agreements to the Client
Engagement Manager, she asked for written confirmation of Sunnyfield’s intent to organise CCTV, so the logistical and legal concerns could be worked through.
392. CCTV cameras were not installed in the house at that time nor have been since.
Eliza explained she has strong views about the need for CCTV to protect Melissa and the other residents of the house, because they ‘cannot speak for themselves in a way that it would be taken seriously by a court or a tribunal.’ She said Melissa has ‘no voice’ and ‘can’t defend herself’ and CCTV could provide a record of things that might happen which she could not speak about. She also said it could provide a measure of protection to staff from false accusations of wrongdoing and could be used as a tool for learning about effective behaviour support strategies.
The Royal commission also stated in this investigation that (August 2021) it would have further consideration and inquiry into the matter of CCTV cameras as a safeguarding measure in supported accommodation and also the role of the NDIS Quality and safety commission is needing to have further inquiry. Good job as the quality commission seems at present conveniently helpless and useless to many parents who go to them with incidents only to be not helped and not having the incidents of harm properly investigated.
502. “We submit that the following matters should be subject to further consideration and inquiry by the Royal Commission in its ongoing work relating to disability service providers:
(a) The potential use of CCTV as a safeguarding measure in supported accommodation.
(b) The role of the NDIS Commission and other external regulators in the oversight of disability service providers, including
i. the extent to which the NDIS Commission can or should rely on information from and investigations by those service providers when responding to complaints and/or reportable incidents, and
ii. whether the NDIS Commission is able to actively monitor the investigation of allegations or complaints of violence, abuse,
neglect or exploitation by service providers, access full versions of any resulting investigation reports, and ensure service providers act on the findings of such reports.
(c) The operation of the national Worker Screening Check system, including the extent to which WSUs are able to access information about allegations of previous misconduct on the part of workers employed to support people with disability.
(d) The extent to which people with disability who have high support needs have appropriate choice and control over where and with whom they live and are not left vulnerable to violence and abuse as a result of homelessness. “
I agree they need to look into the role of the NDIS quality commission who often are not backing up the parents enough or investigating thoroughly the incidents reported to them. In fact they seem to do little at all and even said themselves to me without cameras they could not do anything about the assault on my son James, or any others for that matter if you look at it that lets them off the hook of reporting to the police with no evidence to give and no provider then getting proper address for the violence and harm they allow toward those they say they are looking after. Money remains the main object and providers should not be allowed to have that money if they are so adamant at not having cameras and not protecting the ones they have in their care. If cameras were mandatory then the providers would not be allowed to operate without cameras which are necessary to bring their employees into account for what they do and how they treat the vulnerable on their watch. When they are not watching at all but deliberately turning a blind eye.
Sign my petition change.org/disabilitycameras
and help bring changes and reforms to protect our vulnerable children in disabilities programs, care, accommodation and classrooms the laws need to be made stronger to protect our precious ones...
Anndrea Wheatley x

Join with me to march on INternational disability day 3 December 2021 12pm Friday phone 0409042765
#disabilitylivesmatteroz
#ifjamescouldtalkactiongroup
#cctvcameras4disabilities