Wheelchair accessible with assistance

[vass]

I got a letter from the Victorian Electoral Council about the state election this Saturday. It listed all the polling places in my region, marked FWA if they're fully wheelchair accessible, or AWA if they're wheelchair accessible with assistance. I don't know what 'wheelchair accessible with assistance' means, but I assume it's either "they bring your ballot to you because there's no booth available for your height" or worse, "it's just one step." Either way, there are no fully wheelchair accessible polling places in my district. Not one.

Comments

[jesse_the_k]

particularly this!

[lauredhel]

A gazillion times this. I'm just boggled that State schools still aren't accessible - classrooms, libraries, front offices, the lot. A huge national works project was just underway to build new school buildings, but there has been nothing whatsoever, not even murmurs, about doing simple small adaptations to the enormous stock of existing "just one step" buildings.

Teachers, parents, grandparents, guardians, carers, staff, as well as students with disabilities - all are excluded.

How about we take a bite out of the government grant budget for giant state of the art performing arts and sports centres at unspeakably wealthy private schools, and start making basic local education and voting - BOTH of which are COMFUCKINGPULSORY - actually accessible?

[qem_chibati]

I apologise for coming across as off-topic just this touches on one of my hot-button issues, the NWP for new school buildings.

It's sometimes a matter of someone putting in the paperwork to request it though. My understanding is that there is legislation that means that public schools are required to be accessible if there is a person who is local and wishes to attend that school, although they can minimise the accessibility e.g. re-arranging class schedules to be on the ground floor, policies that work for one person, not many; being awa rather than fully accessible.

I'm boggled that more schools aren't accessible already, and I don't understand why new buildings are being built inappropriately, but I do know that there are schools working to become accessible for potential students that have requested such, so that they will be able to enroll there. I don't know how much time and effort said potential students/teachers have gone through to make it possible*, but primary motivation seemed to be legislative. (*Although there have been many fuck ups with building the lift at one.)


I actually think that the giant national works project money would of been better spent, if there was more individual assessment of schools rather than a grand gesture. I think there were a lot of schools that needed the buildings but there were other schools that would of been better off upgrading/increasing accessibility rather than having a new building that did not resolve any existing issues (such as the old hall being too small / lack of accessibility).

There were extremely wealthy private schools which did not deserve the money who got grants and public schools that literally had a new hall forced upon them against the wishes of the school and the community. (One school had both campaigning to save the trees in the proposed area, stating that their existing hall was serviceable. I guarantee they would of preferred to have made their existing buildings more accessible.)


Unfortunately most public schools got very little say as to how the money was spent as it involved a great deal of time and effort (and needless bureaucracy) to have significant say, on building specific buildings, and not every school has an ex-builder for a principal that can deal with it.

/slightly bitter.

[lauredhel]

And I'm a parent, not a student, so the requirement to kludge faux-accessibility for students doesn't appear to apply. I've spoken to the school, the P&C, and the education department, and I've been wheeling around the school for a long time now making it clear to teachers and other staff alike that I _can't wheel into any classrooms_ (they're all ground floor, but all "just one step". Even if this did apply to parents, that doesn't help voters who have no other connection with a school.

Individual applications and kludges are not a solution to systemic inaccessibility, and they just add more to our "Second Shift".

I haven't heard a single politician getting up and speaking loudly about this. PWD are 20% of the population, and still we're shut out from the very basics of citizenship.

[qem_chibati]

I just wanted to clarify something with what I said last night; when I said that I wish there was more individual assessment, I didn’t really mean, the money should have been determined by the schools to spend entirely at their own prerogative.

I meant that I wish instead of saying “every school should have a new hall”, that it was “every school should have a hall that meets these basic requirements”, including accessibility, because you are right. The school hall is frequently used by the wider community (for voting, fates, events) and should be accessible to such. I am sorry that you are having trouble getting your local school to take that into account and I wish that politicians would.

But as it stands some of the new halls built as part of this project, in Sydney at least, are ultimately less functional and less accessible than the previous existing ones.

I’m resigned to the fact that it’s not feasible to make every building accessible, but I think that making every school hall modern and accessible was not only more desirable but much more feasible than what actually happened.

I also think that there are no excuses for modern school buildings not having accessibility in mind when they are built (not just for the wider population and because it is the right thing to do, but if they are asked for an enrolling student, they are legally obliged to do so, and it is more expensive and disruptive to build and then renovate, then to build it right to begin with).

I agree very much with the sentiments of Individual applications and kludges are not a solution to systemic inaccessibility, and they just add more to our "Second Shift"., although I also think it is at least a start to fixing the issue. I think that fundamentally adhoc changes are problematic because even when they are implemented (sometimes unevenly), it tends to build resentment (why can’t they go to a special needs school?), which is not a healthy environment for the student in question.