Opinions This is a debate post. The post expresses the writer’s views.
Once again, Agenda Kaupang shows that they recommend violations of basic human rights and recommend discriminatory measures against residents with developmental disabilities in Halden municipality.
They ignore the legal security of people with intellectual disabilities.
This appears in the report that the consulting firm has delivered on behalf of the municipality with a service review within health and coping. Just sad that our municipality spends considerable funds on Agenda Kaupang to get such a report. It is not only residents with developmental disabilities who will have a far more difficult life situation if the municipality chooses to follow the report’s recommendations.
Using only numerical bases, the number of inhabitants, statistics etc. is and will be irresponsible in the field of health and coping. Citizens’ needs and individuals must be in focus.
Agenda Kaupang shows a clear position that people with developmental disabilities should not have the same basic rights as the rest of the population. They take us back to the time before the reform in the early 1990s, when there were large institutions and little human dignity. Such a society belongs to the past and was the reason why reform came with cross-party agreement.
People with developmental disabilities must of course have the same right to choose where and how they want to live, on the same level as everyone else, not included in collective services.
Listen to users and service recipients, who often know “where the shoe presses” and can give good advice. Cross-political and national councils and leaders should be heard more in the local community.
Something that is pointed out in NOU “På lik linje”, which came out a few years ago.
The municipalities Agenda Kaupang asks us in Halden to compare ourselves to are not good examples of following national guidelines.
The national guide in the provision of services to people with developmental disabilities from the Norwegian Directorate of Health in 2021 shows good and correct examples of good qualitative services, points to statutory services and should be a guideline for the municipality’s implementation.
Here, Halden also has a long way to go to achieve this quality and scope of services, but is probably in a better position than the municipalities Agenda Kaupang wants us to compare ourselves to.
Gathering groups of residents in large units on the basis of diagnoses and disabilities has proven to be very cost-driving and very unworthy. This leads to far higher sickness absence among employees, greater challenges for residents in between, reduced quality of life and often an increased need for assistance. This is something Halden municipality has experienced and should therefore not follow the consultancy firm’s recommendations for larger units. The municipality cannot ignore the municipality’s duties and the individual’s rights.
I would argue that quality is profitable.
Expressing that Halden should have had 20 fewer housing places for people with developmental disabilities is not serious. Halden has the residents it has and services must be provided based on actual needs, individual assessments and not statistics.
An example could be to listen to the user organization NFU (Norwegian Federation for People with Disabilities), which has given both politicians and the administration many good ideas about changes in day care, work and employment. There, Halden could save millions in annual operating costs and at the same time give more people a more meaningful job.
It requires new thinking and innovation, but unfortunately no one has listened to this.
Completely incomprehensible? What about e.g. former BRAveien dagsenter v/Hjortsberg, which NFU proposed for a small bed and breakfast place, run by people with developmental disabilities? Perhaps too innovative for Halden municipality? Employment that also creates value. It is just an example of the idea input to the NFU. A good offer during the day affects the whole life situation and can contribute to greater well-being, independence and human dignity.
We agree with Agenda Kaupang on one point in the report, and that is that Halden does too little with preventive services, such as relief for families with particularly burdensome care tasks. Here, Halden municipality is failing many families, so that there are unsustainable stresses on relatives. Providing relief based on individual needs, and not in larger institutions, will help reduce costs in the future. In addition to relatives being able to be more active both in working life and the local community.
Proximity from management to services is absolutely crucial and here Halden should probably make changes from his practice of remote management. Blue. housing manager should be included in rotation (e.g. 80% in service provision and 20% in administrative time.
Money saved and close management will probably contribute to a better working environment, reduced sickness absence and greater understanding of service needs, independence and positive development.
That is management with goals and meaning.
So dear elected representatives in Halden; take into account those you are elected by and for and do not let yourself be controlled by a well-paid consulting firm that is on wild roads.
