[bjr70]

Urgent Autism Update from Ottawa!

As many of you are aware, the Hon. Shawn Murphy tabled Bill C-304, a Private Members' Bill, in the House of Commons in 2006. This Bill, named "National Strategy for the Treatment of Autism Act" is critical to our cause as it would not only include autism treatment in Medicare, but would also require the Federal Minister of Health to develop a National Autism Strategy in consultation with the provinces and table the plan in the House of Commons.

Where is the Bill at? What can you do to help?

For a Bill to become law it must be tabled in the House of Commons (First Reading), debated at Second Reading, studied by a Committee, and then voted on and passed following Third Reading. Then it would go through the same thing in the Senate and then get the Royal Assent from the Governor-General. A Private Members' Bill is entitled to two hours of debate at the Second Reading stage. The second hour of debate was held late in the day on February 14, 2007. The vote on the Bill did not take place afterwards as the procedures the House follows is to delay votes and group them together so that more MPs will be present.

Next: the Bill will be the subject of a vote next Wednesday, February 21, 2007 (subject to the usual change without notice), on whether to refer it to the next stage in the approval process, namely, whether or not to refer it to a Committee (probably the Standing Health Committee). The vote will be one where each MP who is present will have their vote recorded in the Hansard, (as opposed to the shouting of "yeah" or "nay" where you can't tell who voted which way).

If the majority of voting MPs vote on Wed. Feb. 21 to refer the Bill to the Committee Stage (also known as "Reporting Stage"), then the Bill continues to live another day. However, if the majority of voting MPs vote against it, the Bill will be dead. Finished. History.

It appears that the Liberals and NDP are willing to support Bill C-304 being referred to Committee. However, the Bloc Quebecois, and a majority of Conservatives (probably 99%) are against it. Whereas the Conservatives were willing to support Motion M-172 to create a National Autism Strategy a few months ago, the Motion is not law and not binding. This Bill C-304 would force the government to put words into action.

What should the autism community do in the critical next few days? What can you do to help promote our common interests?

Probably the best thing our community could do is to contact backbench Conservative MPs and lobby them to vote in favour of referring the matter to the Committee stage. Please contact your MP and any others that you have time to contact and ask them to support Bill C-304 and at least give it a chance to be studied by the Committee. The contact information for all MPs is available from the Parliament of Canada site.

Please spread the word. Time is of the essence. Please take a moment to send your MP and others a message. Below is a same that you can use. Thank you.


Dear XXX, MP:

Re: Support for Bill C-304 Autism Strategy Bill

I am writing to urge you to vote in support of Bill C-304 when the Bill is subject to a vote in the House of Commons. Bill C-304, the "National Strategy for the Treatment of Autism Act" is of critical importance to families with members who suffer from autism. The Centres for Disease Control in the U.S. just recently reported that the prevalence rates of Autism Spectrum Disorders have increased to 1 in 150. By any standard this is a national public health crisis. Yet, not one province offers the core healthcare treatment for autism under Medicare and there is no National Autism Strategy to deal with this growing epidemic. The government has recently made announcements of a National Cancer Strategy, National Heart Health Strategy, National Spinal Cord Rehabilitation Strategy, etc. Although the federal government announced some autism consultation initiatives in November 2006 and supported a motion for a National Autism Strategy in December 2006, these are non-binding and largely symbolic window dressing. Words are not enough. We need action. Please vote to refer Bill C-304 to the next stage in the approval process and let the Committee examine the Bill and do its work. Please urge your fellow MPs to support the Bill. Thank you.

[Ripcat]

You should include autism in the thread title.

Edit:

[bjr70]

BILL C-304
PROJET DE LOI C-304

An Act to provide for the development of a national strategy for the treatment of autism and to amend the Canada Health Act
Loi prévoyant l’élaboration d’une stratégie nationale pour le traitement de l’autisme et modifiant la Loi canadienne sur la santé

Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:
Sa Majesté, sur l’avis et avec le consentement du Sénat et de la Chambre des communes du Canada, édicte :

SHORT TITLE
TITRE ABRÉGÉ

Short title

1. This Act may be cited as the National Strategy for the Treatment of Autism Act.
1. Loi sur la stratégie nationale de traitement de l’autisme. Titre abrégé

NATIONAL CONFERENCE
CONFÉRENCE NATIONALE

National conference

2. The Minister of Health shall, before December 31, 2006, convene a conference of all provincial and territorial ministers responsible for health for the purpose of working together to develop a national strategy for the treatment of autism. The Minister shall, before December 31, 2007, table a report in both Houses of Parliament specifying a plan of action developed in collaboration with the provincial and territorial ministers for the purpose of implementing that strategy.
2. Le ministre de la Santé convoque, avant le 31 décembre 2006, une conférence des ministres provinciaux et territoriaux responsables de la santé afin qu’ils se concertent en vue d’élaborer une stratégie nationale pour le traitement de l’autisme. Le ministre dépose devant les deux chambres du Parlement, avant le 31 décembre 2007, un rapport faisant état du plan d’action établi en collaboration avec les ministres provinciaux et territoriaux pour la mise en oeuvre de cette stratégie. Conférence nationale

R.S., c. C-6

AMENDMENTS TO THE CANADA HEALTH ACT
MODIFICATION DE LA LOI CANADIENNE SUR LA SANTÉ L.R., ch. C-6

3. Section 2 of the Canada Health Act is renumbered as subsection 2(1) and is amended by adding the following:
3. L’article 2 de la Loi canadienne sur la santé devient le paragraphe 2(1) et est modifié par adjonction de ce qui suit :

Autism Spectrum Disorder

(2) For the purposes of this Act, services that are medically necessary or required under this Act include Applied Behavioural Analysis (ABA) and Intensive Behavioural Intervention (IBI) for persons suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder.
(2) Pour l’application de la présente loi, sont comprises parmi les services médicalement nécessaires sous le régime de celle-ci l’analyse appliquée du comportement (AAC) et l’intervention comportementale intensive (ICI) destinées aux personnes atteintes de troubles du spectre autistique. Troubles du spectre autistique

[SJ-24]

Well, here is my problem with your problems. Why is your problem suddenly mine? Why should I take tax dollars out of my pocket so your handicapped problem becomes everyones responsibility?

[Knoss]

It is simply a case of medical treatment for Autism being covered by Medicare, same as going to the doctor for a cold.


But what about education? How is education effected by this act and are dose it defferentiate between those who are disabled, and those with High Functioning Autism?

[Ripcat]

lily lily:

SJ-24 SJ-24:

Well, here is my problem with your problems. Why is your problem suddenly mine? Why should I take tax dollars out of my pocket so your handicapped problem becomes everyones responsibility?

Why shouldn't we?

Tell you what, SJ - you figure out how much of your tax dollars are going to this, PM me the amount, and I'll reimburse you. I think it's worth it.

Let's just use his tax dollars used to plow snow from his road to cover these costs. Heaven forbid my tax dollars went to plow someone else's road. Snow on his road isn't my problem.

[ShepherdsDog]

Knoss Knoss:

It is simply a case of medical treatment for Autism being covered by Medicare, same as going to the doctor for a cold.


But what about education? How is education effected by this act and are dose it defferentiate between those who are disabled, and those with High Functioning Autism?

Most of those with Aspberger's Syndrome (what you call high functioning) have normal IQ's. They're problem is largely an inability to socially interact with others. They can hold down any job as long as there isn't a lot of contact with others. Autism is known as an umbrella disorder now, because it has multiple complications and is experienced differently by each afflicted, as far as we can tell. We still know very little about this bizarre disorder.

[Knoss]

I guess I'm thinking of HFA such as Aspergers Syndrome as often treated throuogh counselling, and I am wondering how this legilaslation will interfere were counseling is given thought he school system. I recall a supreme court case a few years a ago, I presume the basis of this.

Is this appropreate federal legiaslation or is it a provincial matter?

[bjr70]

Knoss Knoss:

It is simply a case of medical treatment for Autism being covered by Medicare, same as going to the doctor for a cold.


But what about education? How is education effected by this act and are dose it defferentiate between those who are disabled, and those with High Functioning Autism?

Education is part of a National Strategy, as well as research, surveilance and standards. Most parents of the 1:166 autistics can not afford the therapy required to allow their kids to reach full potential. Programs and funding are shetchy across Canada. Families relocate, go bankrupt, and divorce from the stress of trying to do the best they can. Autism is lifelong. It makes more sense to help autistics acheive full potential now, possibly contibuting to society, than the huge cost to society-at-large of long-term care in the future.

If you need further clarification let me know, I'd be more than willing to illustrate the daily struggles of autistic famillies across Canada.

[Knoss]

I was reffering more to HFA and Aspergers Syndrome.

[bjr70]

Autism is a "spectrum" disorder, and as such different cases will require different approaches. What a National Strategy addresses is the need to provide a standard of treatment with surveilance to all autistics Canada wide. Not just Alberta whose services are available to 18 yrs old. Ontario, services are cut off at 6, some places it is non-existant. Is this the Canada we live in? Let's not go to an American style of Healthcare where the rich are the only ones who can get it. All kids should be afforded the opportunity to reach full potential.

[SJ-24]

Ripcat Ripcat:

lily lily:

SJ-24 SJ-24:

Well, here is my problem with your problems. Why is your problem suddenly mine? Why should I take tax dollars out of my pocket so your handicapped problem becomes everyones responsibility?

Why shouldn't we?

Tell you what, SJ - you figure out how much of your tax dollars are going to this, PM me the amount, and I'll reimburse you. I think it's worth it.

Let's just use his tax dollars used to plow snow from his road to cover these costs. Heaven forbid my tax dollars went to plow someone else's road. Snow on his road isn't my problem.

First off you Ripcat, I own a Hummer that get me anywhere I need to be no matter how many cm's of snow falls.

But back to the topic. I asked an honest question. Why should this group of people be given billions of dollars for a condition that will still not allow their offspring to function in such a manor as to be a helpful part of society. I need to know more before I give any support. And this is where you bleeding heart liberals get all fucked up. You hate it when people questions something. You take it as an attack on humanity instead of good value for money. When it comes to kids I have a huge heart, unlike my love for the Liberal party. But I need to know how my tax dollars are spent and if it's worth the process to train these kids. The money might be better spent building institutions and employing bleeding heart liberals to looking after them....like in the old days when we had institutions where the kids were safe. Now they are spread out all over the country and many are left to themselves when parents die off. Its in the news everyday. Just last week two handicapped adults were run down and killed by a SUV in Campbell River. Traggic, but should have been expected since the parents had died two months earlier and no one was around to look after them. Institutions don't exit anymore and there are not enough homes to house these people in because of the shortage of funds. Sowhat is better, housing the mentally disabled, or training Autisitc kids? The money trough is not endless. At some point we must make decisions on wher ethe money is best spent. Without asking the tough questions, we won't know for sure.

So before I start pising on my MP, I want all the facts beside one tiny news item. And since this person is an expert, he or she will know where the best information is on the subject.

[bjr70]

FOR THOSE WHO STILL NEED MORE CLARIFICATION:

Mr. Brian Murphy (Moncton—Riverview—Dieppe, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say a few words on Bill C-304, An Act to provide for the development of a national strategy for the treatment of autism and to amend the Canada Health Act.


First, I would like to congratulate the hon. member for Charlottetown for the work done in this House on this bill.


Bill C-304 is a very important bill, as we can see from the debate on it, although a private member's bill may well work toward defining and differentiating different parties views of who will be left behind and who will not.


I am very pleased to rise and offer my support to Bill C-304, as it provides a national strategy, in law, for the treatment of autism.


The bill incorporates three main provision.


First, we are asking the Minister of Health to convene a conference involving the ten provincial and territorial health ministers to discuss the important issue and begin crafting a national strategy for the treatment of autism.


Second, we are asking the Minister of Health to table a formal strategy for the treatment of autism before the end of 2007.


Third, the bill asks that the Canada Health Act be amended to include applied behaviour analysis, ABA, and intensive behavioural intervention, IBI, as medically necessary for required services.


These measures are considered provisions designed to address a very real health problem in our country, one that affects thousands of Canadian families, no less detrimental than the diagnosis of terminal cancer or any other maladies that affect Canadians in general.


Let me tell members about a real life situation in my province of New Brunswick. I know a couple who have three children. They are seven, five and three years old. The first two of these children were diagnosed with autism. One of the children did not speak until he was three and a half years old. He had been very aggressive and he had many odd self-stimulatory behaviours. The parents did not know how to cope with the problem. He was described by a pediatric neurologist as severely autistic. The second child appeared to be less severely autistic, but she did not learn to speak until she was three years old, did not interact with her peers and seemed withdrawn from the outside world.


When the diagnosis was made some time ago, the discussion centred around appropriate treatment. Unfortunately, ABA was just in its infancy with respect to recommended treatment in the province of New Brunswick. There was no funding available and no professional help available.


These two very fine people, Charlotte and Luigi Rocca, read books. She retired from her law practice and devoted herself to her two autistic children. Through ABA and the expenditure of hundreds of thousands of dollars over the years, the results are astounding. These two children, to use one example of their achievements, at the grade two level lead the class now in their reading skills in English. They are involved in soccer and tae kwan do, not exactly sports that require retreat from the madding crowd around us. They are two very well developed, normal children. However, this did not happen with the help of the New Brunswick medical care system or the Canadian national Health Act.


ASD is a complex of potentially devastating problem for parents such as the Roccas. It affects people's ability to communicate, form relationships and interact with their environment. Within the spectrum there are specific diagnoses: pervasive development disorders, Rett syndrome, Asperger syndrome and child development disorder.


Symptoms can vary widely. Some who suffer from ASD are capable of leading normal, healthy, happy, productive lives. Many more, however, require extensive treatment to mitigate or compensate for unresponsive, uncommunicative and sometimes violent and self-destructive behaviour.


After a diagnosis, if children receive treatment early enough, typically before the age of six, and intensively enough, typically 30 to 40 hours per week, studies have shown that up to 50% can recover to the point of being indistinguishable from their peers. Even those who do not recover completely can show great improvement.


The debate is over. ABA and IBI treatments work. Both are designed to teach autism sufferers how to function in the world. When they are employed, the results can be dramatic and encouraging.


Until recently our understanding of both the incidence and special costs of autism was fairly primitive. However, the most recent, reliable information suggests that as many as one in 167 Canadian children suffer from some form of ASD.


We also know there is no cure and that there are financial burdens borne by families mostly in this country. The treatments can be as high as $60,000 a year. It is an extraordinary load to ask average Canadian parents who are victimized by this disorder to carry for even a short period of time, but the evidence is clear that the money spent on the treatment is effective and we can do something about it by making it a national health question. What can parliamentarians do to help lighten the load? They can do as the hon. member for Charlottetown has done in proposing this bill.


The courts have already rejected the argument that governments share a responsibility to treat autism and there are other constitutional issues to consider. How far should the federal government go on a health issue that properly falls within provincial jurisdiction? This has been referred to by my colleagues. However, the member for Charlottetown and I believe that the House has a moral responsibility to do everything it can. Make no mistake, we can do a lot. The Canada Health Act comes from Parliament.


Currently, medicare does not provide for the treatment of autism. Without sufficient public health care coverage, families will continue to mortgage their homes, extend their lines of credit or even bankrupt themselves as they desperately search for ways to pay for the cost of treatment. Many who run out of options will simply have no choice but to select treatment on the basis of affordability rather than clinical need.


How is that different than an American system of medical care delivery? How is it different to say that if parents have money they can get ABA or IBI, the treatment necessary to make their children performing members and integrated into society. The treatment works. It is very expensive and it should be afforded under any national health care scheme.


The act is not asking that much. It is asking, first, that the Minister of Health convene his counterparts, the ministers of health throughout the provinces and territories. In my province of New Brunswick the minister of health is very open to this suggestion.


The second suggests that the Minister of Health, who may be well on the road to doing this, posits and strategizes a national strategy to combat autism. While this may have been done outside the confines of this place, we think the bill before us, presented by the hon. member for Charlottetown, is the appropriate way to ensure that it is done in a proper manner.


It is not fair, equal or just. Protecting all of the citizens of Canada from crippling illnesses that financially burden families unfairly and end up in treatment of maladies different throughout the provinces and different according to one's means could not have been the vision of Tommy Douglas. This could not have been the vision of those who have modified the health acts across this country over the last 40 years.


Beyond this, there is a big difference in the availability of treatment across Canadian provinces, as we have just indicated. In Alberta, for example, children have full access. In Ontario, kids have access up to a certain age. In other provinces, such as in my province of New Brunswick, it is simply not available except perhaps through means tested social services or welfare programs.


Again I ask you, Mr. Speaker, and all members of the House: Is that fair, particularly when we have the Canada Health Act to help us develop new policies and programs that will benefit our most vulnerable citizens? Clearly, we must acknowledge that provincial health care plans are just that, provincial. We must respect the division of powers between federal and provincial levels of government, but that does not mean that we should abrogate our responsibility as parliamentarians within the constitutional framework.


Again, Bill C-304 is a noble effort to deliver a national health care strategy for the treatment of autism and to treat all Canadians afflicted by this in a fair and equal manner.


Hon. Shawn Murphy (Charlottetown, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, as the previous speakers have indicated, this is an extremely important issue, and I would suggest it is a raging issue right across the country. The prevalence of autism is extremely high and seems to be rising. The cause remains unknown, but we all know that early diagnosis and intervention is so important.


Let us make it absolutely clear to everyone in this room and everyone watching these proceedings that this is a health issue. That train has left the station; no one in this House is prepared to debate that issue.


However, autism is not treated as a health issue. Many provinces treat autism in the social services envelope. It is subject to a means test; people are told they will get money if they do not have any money. It is not treated in the same way as other health issues, such as cancer and heart problems. It is totally inconsistent from one province to another province. In some provinces it is a small amount of money from the social services envelope. Other provinces have more progressive plans that provide ABA and IBI treatment. While they are not totally accepted, they are the generally accepted treatment modalities for this particular problem.


We are talking of what I classify as orphans in the health system. It cries out for a response from the federal government, but also from the provincial governments. I suggest the provincial governments would certainly be willing to talk to the federal government and come forward with a combined response.


Let me be absolutely clear that this will happen. Whether it happens with Bill C-304 or a future bill, it is going to happen.


If parliamentarians in the House of Commons are not prepared to deal with it, there is another body that will deal with it and that is the courts. Someone is going to bring it to court and the judge is going to ask, “Is it a health issue?” Yes. “Is this the accepted modality of treating the health issue?” Yes. Then that judge is going to say, “I am not prepared to discriminate between someone with this particular problem and someone with cancer”, and the judge will order the provinces to pay for it.


I would ask the members of this assembly to be bold and courageous and do the right thing. I urge them to pass this legislation before we are dragged into the courts kicking and screaming.


There will be people who will stand up, and some have already, and give all kinds of excuses. One member said earlier that it is a provincial issue. I find that somewhat hypocritical. It is a provincial issue, but the federal government has a responsibility.


Only about 40 minutes ago we passed a private member's motion. The government members all stood up and voted for it. I will read the motion:


That, in the opinion of the House, the Minister of Health should continue to work collaboratively with Statistics Canada, the provincial and territorial cancer registries, and key stakeholders towards the ultimate goal of creating uniform national standards and guidelines for the surveillance of all malignant and benign brain tumours, including data collection, analysis and reporting.



That is a cancer issue. I would suggest that is a provincial issue if we accept the arguments of the members across. That is only an excuse.


I would suggest that the people of Canada are watching us on this particular issue. Just last week George Bush, who represents a country that does not have a public health system, passed a bill and voted a billion dollars on this particular issue. I would hope that we would not fall behind George Bush when dealing with this particular issue.


On this very important issue I urge everyone to do the right thing and support Bill C-304.

[SJ-24]

Listen, I'm sorry for your kid's problem, but I still see no proof that any of these kids are going to become members of our society that actually make a difference. Can they be independent, or will they always have to have a "handler"? At what point does this become a waste of money? Can little Johnny do more than sit in a corner reciting biblical passages verbatum, or counting cards in vegas? I'm not against giving people help, I just need to know how much and how far these treatments my tax dollars are going to have to purchased when the health portfolio is already over burdened with needs of people that have already given much to society, or those that can give plenty. These are the arguments that need to be taken into consideration. So far I've read much that tells me how it's going to help families that have children with this problem. Sounds great, but this is about money and as we all know, or perhaps some of you are not aware, but money doesn't geow on trees and some of us want our taxes lower, not higher. That means you have more homework to do if you want the government to start handing out cheques. Simply expecting the bleeding heart factor to kick in doesn't work anymore. The People are realizing that accountability is what matters these days. And according to the poll this morning, more and more people are starting to understand that the Conservatives are the party to support. the Liberals are dying and your MP's private member's bill is about to die. Perhaps you might pay attention to the budget this time around. When the Liberals and NDP poo poo it and vote against it, that will trigger an election and the media is saying a majority is not out of hte question.

Now that I've hit you with the truth, consider that I'm not against your request. I actually think there is a need for some form of Federal help and an action plan, but it's not just me you have to convince. There are far more people than I that think your problem is simply your problem. Some think that their tax dollars can be better spent. Make a good case by showing facts, not heart felt tears. Tears are not enough in this day and age.

[bjr70]

Stereotyping with "Rainman" will definitely not give you the true picture of what autism means.
Wait until you are personally affected.
I've asked some of my correspondants to contribute to this forum.
Have a good life. The vote is tommorrow.