Shameful

shame·ful/ˈSHāmfəl/
Adjective
Worthy of or causing shame or disgrace.
Synonyms
disgraceful - ignominious - scandalous - infamous

The word hardly does justice to my thoughts and feelings when I read this earlier today.

The federal government is asking the Supreme Court to overturn a court ruling that would force it to pay the cost of caring for a severely disabled aboriginal teenager living at home. 

The precedent-setting case involves an 18-year-old on the Pictou Landing reserve in Nova Scotia and his principal caregiver mother — who herself suffered a debilitating stroke in 2010. 

Last month the Federal Court ruled that Ottawa was wrong to cover only a fraction of the cost of care for Jeremy Meawasige, who suffers from cerebral palsy and autism, among other disabilities.

Really? Seriously?? I mean, haven't they done enough already?

The federal government really wants to continue fighting this when they've already lost twice in court?

They really want to continue fighting this when the House of Commons unanimously voted in favour of adopting Jordan's Principle in 2005 and federal departments publicly pledged to respect Jordan's Principle in their policies?

They really want to fight this when the Federal Court has found that Ottawa's unlawful failure to cover only $2,200 of the $8,200 a month cost of Jeremy's care leaves his family with no other option than institutionalization and separation from his mother and his community?

~  ~  ~  ~

By the way, want to hear a funny?

A departmental spokeswoman for Aboriginal Affairs said the government continues to make the health and safety of First Nations a priority. 

“The government of Canada will work with the Pictou Landing First Nation for the reimbursement of home-care costs incurred related to Mr. Meawasige’s need, however following careful consideration we have decided to appeal the decision,” Genevieve Guibert said in an e-mail. 

“Canada is committed to working with the community and the province to ensure appropriate supports are in place for the family moving forward.”

Oh, okay, now I get it.

Run along, it's all taken care of now.

Don't you see - the government is all about working with the First Nations to reimburse Jeremy's home care costs.

Which, of course, would completely explain the how and why behind the Canadian government - your and my federal government - spending over $3 million to date just so they won't have to pay the $8,200 per month required to keep Jeremy at home.

Ever wonder what's really going on?

“We think that after these cases go through, the federal government’s programs for first nations people will need a drastic overhaul in order to deliver services equal to what other Canadians receive,” said Kent Elson, a Toronto lawyer who is involved in the policing and special education challenges. 

But if the government wins, recently won powers for first nations to launch human rights complaints would be severely restricted, the acting head of the Canadian Human Rights Commission has said.

“We think this is one of the most important human rights issues this decade,” Mr. Elson added.

And to think that people continue to ask me, with a straight face, nonetheless, why I have never (and could never picture myself) voted Conservative.

Now that's brazen.

This & That

Just a quick note to say that I've updated the "Places To Be" link on the sidebar (about 1/3 of the way down the page if you're not familiar with it).

It's nice to see that the IWK has brought back the EASE program (which has been conspicuously absent for quite some time now) and HACL still has some interesting upcoming workshops [such as "Planning for the Future - Pre-employment", "Planning for the Future - Living Independently in the Community" and "Putting it All Together - Individual Program Plans (IPPs)"] over the next couple of months.

And, of course, I would remiss not to mention my own upcoming workshops in May, one in Halifax (May 13th) and one in Berwick (May 18th) - both will include presentations on "Understanding the Legal Options to Support an Adult with an Intellectual Disability" and "Protecting Your Child's Financial Future".

That's not all, of course - there are a few other interesting upcoming events to be found there as well so be sure to check out the entire list.

~  ~ ~

One other tip to pass on - we've talked in the past about the importance of the Disability Tax Credit and even some information on how to go about applying for it. But I recently came across an article that sets out some of the issues to be aware of with such companies. So you might just want to check that out, too. After all, forewarned is forearmed, right?

~ ~ ~

Almost forgot - for anyone interested, the federal government is conducting a study concerning government programs for persons with disabilities and issues related to saving for the future. You might be eligible to participate if you or an immediate family member is in receipt of the Disability Tax Credit. Participation involves either a 2-hour focus group or a 40-minute telephone interview.

To volunteer for the study, call 1-866-770-4649 and leave a message with your name and telephone number. Someone will call you back to confirm your eligibility for the study.

Oh yeah, did I forget to mention .. you will be paid a $75 honorarium for participating.

So we have that going for us, which is nice.

Tax Time Tips

Realizing this might be a wee bit late for some (such as those who do a much better job of getting their act together than I), but hoping it will fall in the category of better later than never (as opposed to "too little, too late"), I offer you some tips for that most favourite time of the year ... Income Tax time!

First up: Tax Planning and the Disability Tax Credit
(And just as an aside, if you're not familiar with the DTC, you have some serious reading to do - just follow that last link and scroll down past this post.)

Secondly: The new Family Caregiver Amount Credit
(Not to be confused with the Caregiver Amount Credit - both of which can be claimed in the right circumstances)

And Third: Isn't it frustrating when you KNOW something to be so, know you've read it before but you just can't seem to find the proof? And even more frustrating when it's a tax question that you take to the CRA, only to be told that "No, you're wrong, you can't do that", when you KNOW darn well you can?

Well, that was my story until this past weekend when I finally came across the proof I was looking for (ironically, by following a link on this very blawg). All this to say...

Yes, Victoria, you can claim the cost of your child's private LD school tuition (and room and board, if applicable) if your child has the DTC. (Scroll 3/4 of the way down this page and look at No. 8 "Fees for Specialized Camps (Summer and Winter) and Specialized Schools").

There you go - run along and have some fun now.

He's Baaaaack...

UPDATE: The Assembly of First Nations' Response

I've written on more than one occasion about the discrimination faced by Jeremy Meawasige (and other First Nations' children) like him.

Let's say it altogether, shall we?

J-O-R-D-A-N-'S  P-R-I-N-C-I-P-L-E

Now that wasn't that so hard, was it?

For once, I am pleased to report good news. For now anyway. *

OTTAWA — The Federal Court has ordered Ottawa to reimburse a First Nations band for the cost of taking care of a severely disabled teenager living at home — a ruling that could have widespread implications for federal social services on reserves. 

“It sets an important precedent to ensure all First Nations children across Canada are given equal access to essential government services,” said Paul Champ, the lawyer for the boy’s mother. 

The case centres around 18-year-old Jeremy Meawasige, who has hydrocephalus, cerebral palsy, spinal curvature and autism, is self-abusive and can only communicate with his mother, Maurina Beadle.

You might recall that federal officials have been arguing (both in and out of court) that they were in complete compliance with Jordan's Principle and providing funding in line with provincial programs. But the court found that what they had refused to hadn't taken into account was "provincial provisions for special circumstances".

Of course, some of us might call that very proposition into question too - since when, exactly, has there been "provincial provisions for special circumstances", you ask?

Good question.

And up until the 2011 decision of the Nova Scotia Supreme Court in Boudreau, it appeared that the answer was that there were no "provincial provisions for special circumstances", at least not in Nova Scotia.

["As you know the Direct Family Support program bases its respite amount on $10 per hour. Unfortunately Services for Persons with Disabilities (SPD) staff have not been authorized to increase this hourly amount at this time. In regards to the possibility of increasing your monthly amount, in order that you can use the additional funding to pay extra per hour, SPD has not been authorized to allow any increases which result in payments exceeding $2200 per month. As Brian’s current respite allowance already exceeds $2200 per month no increase may be authorized at this time."]

However, Boudreau, as you will recall, not only settled the question of whether the Services for Persons with Disabilities program is authorized by legislation, it also made it clear that there is nothing voluntary about the SPD program  (once eligibility for services has been shown/accepted, a legal entitlement arises automatically) and, as with any other “assistance” under the Social Assistance Act, eligibility triggers not just a right to that assistance but one that is to be immediately provided.

Even better, the court in Boudreau found that, generally, the SPD Program falls under the ‘special needs assistance’ provisions in the Social Assistance Act and, in situations where the legislation does not stipulate a maximum amount for such assistance, the Department should be paying “reasonable” amounts sufficient to meet the need.

And so it was, with a stroke of Justice Rosinski's pen in the Boudreau decision, that the Province could no longer rely on the November, 2009 directive from the Director of the SPD program limiting the Direct Family Support program approval levels for respite funding to $2200 per month.

And that decision in Boudreau, you see, was exactly what Maurina Beadle and the Pictou Landing Band Council relied on in their successful judicial review application for Jeremy Meawasig.

Back to that good news I mentioned in the beginning of this post - the Federal Court ruling now obligates Ottawa to uphold Jordan’s principle ... in more than just principle, one might say.

“Jordan’s principle is not to be narrowly interpreted", Justice Leonard Mandamin warned.

And although Mr. Justice Mandamin didn't say exactly how much the federal government should be paying to the Pictou Landing band council, after noting that Jeremy's mother is often the only one who is able to understand and communicate with him and Jeremy's only other option would be institutionalization and separation from his mother and community, the court indicated that it should be a lot more than the $2,200 it is already paying. It is expected that this decision will give Jeremy's mother and the band council grounds to demand a full reimbursement.

There's more to this story, of course.

Go read the piece in the Chronicle Herald to see the reaction of Jeremy’s 23-year-old brother, Jonavan Meawasige, who has taken on much of Jeremy's home care over the past two years, while also trying to fish for a living and the expected implications for other First Nations children, including in a separate case on First Nations child welfare in front of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, where it is being argued that First Nations children have the right to welfare services on par with what provincial governments offer off-reserve children.

Well, imagine that. Now what do you suppose they will think of next?

* Hoping and praying this decision won't get appealed by the federal government. And that our provincial government will stop trying to do an end run around the Bourdreau decision, telling families that it has no absolutely no application to their particular case, when that is, at a minimum, very debatable.

BLAWG MAKE OVER

A new look. A makeover of sorts for Spring.
Or, at least, what passes for Spring in Nova Scotia.

So what do you think?

A Rose By Any Other Name ...

I must say that I find it amazing how closely this list of changes to disciplinary policies that Mississippi schools have agreed to due to "discriminatory" practices against black students mirror exactly the changes that need to be made to accommodate students with disabilities.

Leaving me to wonder ... must we paint our children's skin a different colour in order to have their constitutionally-protected rights recognized and respected?

P-P-P-P-P-Purple. Again.

Purple Day is fast approaching.

And Purple Day is a bit of a big thing around here, as you might recall.

Meaning right at the moment I am up to my eyeballs in posters, buttons, wallet cards, Purple Daisies, brochures, pamphlets, bookmarks, pens, stickers ... the list goes on.

And cupcakes, of course ... right, never forget the cupcakes!

So while we prepare to do our small part in the grand endeavour to paint the world Purple ...

Please remember to Wear Purple on March 26th.

And have A Very Coole Purple Day.

"Limited Scope" Legal Services Now Available in Nova Scotia

The Nova Scotia Barristers' Society has recently announced that "limited scope" legal services will now be allowed in Nova Scotia.

"Things just got easier for Nova Scotians who want to retain a lawyer for just a portion of a legal matter. Although many lawyers already provide “limited scope legal services,” new clarity and direction in the legal profession’s rules of conduct should improve public access to a broader range of these services."

This means that lawyers in the Province will now be allowed to represent a client for only part of a matter, without the expectation that they are acting generally in the matter or are the solicitor of record.

This so-called ‘unbundling’ of legal services has become fairly common in other parts of Canada and in the US, particularly as lawyers now often find themselves competing with online legal document service providers.

But it's good news for the public because if offers more possibilities for that large segment of the population who doesn’t qualify for Legal Aid and is simply unable to afford the cost of hiring a lawyer to represent them throughout an entire matter. And, as you might recall that, when it came to the issue of applying for guardianship of an adult family member, it was exactly this same situation that motivated me to create the Nova Scotia Legal Guardianship Kit.

The new rules will now allow lawyers and clients to agree on exactly what legal services the lawyer will provide, meaning that the lawyer might be hired just to prepare affidavits or other documents, for example, while the client acts alone in court or the lawyer might attend court only to examine or cross-examine a witness, while the client handles the rest of the matter.

As I said, this really should be a win-win situation for the public, offering access to the legal system to a group of people that have become more and more marginalized, while lawyers are held to the same standard of competence for that portion of the matter they agree to undertake as is always required in any situation of legal representation.

Of course, good communication will be crucial as both parties need to be completely clear and on the same page as to who, exactly, is responsible for doing what, exactly. So should you find yourself considering proceeding in such a manner, please ensure (for your own protection and to avoid any possible misunderstanding) that it is clearly specified, in writing, exactly what the lawyer is agreeing to do and what you, as the client, are responsible for doing yourself.

And as for me, speaking both personally and professionally, I must say that I find this whole concept of "unbundling" very exciting as I look forward to the next phase of my life.

Batter Up

That would be you and me, folks.

Just another reminder that a series of community meetings* start this week across the Province. A series of community meetings that persons with disabilities, their family members and their friends need to attend.

The meetings follow the government's release of the long awaited Continuing Care/Services for Persons with Disabilities discussion paper, "Putting People First - Working Together to Support Independence and Dignity".

Let's admit it. We're all pretty good at moaning and complaining calling the government out on the pathetic situation facing persons with disabilities in this Province, both in housing and otherwise. And rightfully so.

But the question in my mind is "Will we be just as committed to doing our part to find a solution?".

Criticism is easy; finding solutions is often much more difficult.

So here's your chance, read the discussion paper (which, honestly, doesn't tell really tell those who live this day in and day out anything we didn't already know but at least it acknowledges the problem and appears to want to move forward) and come out to a meeting in your area*.

Bring your spouse, your children, your friends. But, most importantly, bring your self.

As they say - you're either part of the problem or part of the solution. Which will you be?

* A meeting in Digby has now been added.
Thursday, April 4, 3013 ~ 4:00 - 6:00 pm
Annapolis Basin Conference Centre
761 Broadway Ave., Cornwallis Park
Cornwallis Room.

Failing to 'Educate Peter"

I came across this video in a blog post entitled "Is Full Inclusion a Good Idea?".

And after watching the video, I completely understand why they felt the need to ask the question. Go ahead and watch - I found it both fascinating and appalling.



So tell me, please, how can anyone, for even one minute, suggest that this is "inclusion"?

Where was Peter's aide? They didn't really expect one teacher to handle him and the rest of the class, did they? Didn't he have an IEP (IPP)? A behavioral plan perhaps? Why where there so little consequences attached to his behavior?

I was shocked to see Peter get away with kicking the other boy in the face. And as the parent of a mentally challenged child, I would be mad as hell to have seen her "educated" in this manner. You and I know that they weren't doing Peter any favors. He needed to be taught appropriate behavior and that actions have consequences.

That they put the other students and his teacher through that was unbelievable. That they put Peter through that was unforgivable.

And how about teaching him that the way we interact with Dad (for example) is not the way we are to interact with other kids (the hug and kiss with the apology)? After watching the end of the video, I totally got why Peter would jump on the backs of the other students - it was a game he played with Dad.

I suppose it might be argued that at least some good ultimately came from their methods based on his behavior four months later, but ... really??

Perhaps we should spread this video around as an example of how NOT to educate our children.

'To Fight the Unbeatable Foe'

UPDATE: Advocacy wins the day. Now, for heaven's sake, please let these ladies live in peace.

To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go 

These were the words that came to my mind today when I read that a ReMax real estate agent is appealing the Town of Bridgewater's decision to change its zoning bylaws to allow LaHave Manor Corp. to open a new group home.

You might recall last Spring when the LeHave Corporation attempted to purchase a property that was ideally-suited for use as a group home by three women that have lived together for over 18 years. It seemed like a great idea until neighbours started complaining and the Town decided that the property couldn't become a group home because it violated zoning bylaws -bylaws that allowed for "low density residential housing", also known as single family dwellings. Apparently, the Town viewed three people living together in the community as an "institution".

But just when we thought saner heads had prevailed and all was well (the Town changed its by-laws to allow the group home to be opened), we now come to find out that Ron Bullen, an agent with RE/MAX South Shore Realty, along with a merry group of fellow real estate agents, has filed an appeal of the Town`s decision with the Nova Scotia Utility and Review Board.

The reason? Apparently they are afraid that the group home will cause real estate values in the "upscale neighbourhood" to fall.

Seriously?

To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star

One of the better lines in the article has to belong to local resident Brian Tennyson, who stateed at a public meeting that he's not opposed to the zoning change because it's a "residential-care facility", but because "councillors and staff were manipulated, pressured and intimidated by LaHave Manor Corp".

Hey, you might just be on to something there, Mr. Tennyson. Town Council might just have been intimidated. And some things are, indeed, worthy of intimidation.

Such as the public statements recently made by the Minister of Community Services to the effect that persons with disabilities have the right to live in the community and if you disagree ... well, that's too bad.

Also worthy of intimidation? The fact that you might just be running afoul of the United Nations' Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

"Bridgewater prides itself on being an inclusive community and as such wants to incorporate the intent of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities," the release said. "We acknowledge that the rights of disabled persons are equal to the rights of any other person in our community."

This fight is not, cannot, be over.

Perhaps a few well-placed letters to ReMax letting them know what Nova Scotians think of the actions of their agent in this matter? Perhaps an online petition boycotting ReMax unless this matter is resolved?

And, if anyone knows the names of the other real estate agents involved, I would love to hear them.

Putting People First?

I received an email from NSACL today, with the following information.

The Nova Scotia government has finally released the long awaited Continuing Care/Services for Persons with Disabilities discussion paper. It's entitled "Putting People First - Working Together to Support Independence and Dignity". 

A series of community meetings have been set up by Department of Community Services and parents and self-advocates are encouraged to attend. 

Not only does NSACL strongly encourage you to review the document and attend a local community meeting, but so do I. 

Please. As family members, if they can't make their voices heard on their own, it is up to us to do so for them. Whether that means attending and speaking on their behalf or attending with your family member, speaking yourself and encouraging them to say what they can, we can't miss this opportunity.

And if your family member is relatively high-functioning, you might just want to give the latter a try. I was amazed at how well my daughter did at one of the housing consultations earlier this year. Sitting at a table without me but where she fortuitously knew one other person, she was helped to put together what SHE needed to say and she did a great job. Not only was it incredibly empowering for her but it seemed to make a real impact on the room.

The Discussion Paper : "Putting People First - Working Together to Support Independence and Dignity"

Schedule of Community Meetings

All in a Twitter

It's all in a twitter, I am.

It finally happened. I done went and did it! *

Admittedly, what finally made me branch out to Twitter was the need to keep an eye on my daughter's shenanigans, but as long as I was already there ...

Won't you please come tweet with me?

As I've mused before, I intend to use am using Twitter to throw out those interesting little tidbits I so often come across on the Road to Hell (it being paved with good intentions and all), but never actually get around to blogging about.

That's right - I have just already begun to Tweet. Hope to see you there!

* Does this officially make me a Twit? 
Do my feathers look okay??

Disability and Human Rights Public Discussion Panel

I will get this put on the sidebar, eventually, I promise but I wanted to get this up now because tonight ... well, I am happy to say that tonight is time for a little "me time".

So for now, I will just have to leave you with this.

Date: March 6, 2013 @ 7 pm 

Location: Weldon Law Building, Dalhousie University 

On March 11, 2010, Canada ratified the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). The Convention, created to “promote, protect and ensure the full and equal enjoyment of all human rights and fundamental freedoms by all persons with disabilities, and to promote respect for their inherent dignity” serves to strengthen the Charter right to equality, as well as ensure federal, provincial and municipal laws respect the equal rights of persons with disabilities in all facets of Canadian life.

The ratification of the CRPD has presented a powerful opportunity for us to examine the accessibility and inclusivity of our province, and identify areas that need to be improved. The Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission, in partnership with Dalhousie University, Schulich School of Law and the Disabled Persons Commission, is committed to advocating for the full realization of CRPD rights in Nova Scotia, and is eager to engage in meaningful dialogue with our community on strategies for moving forward.

As part of an ongoing effort to ensure the full realization of CRPD rights through an inclusive and accessible Nova Scotia, we cordially invite you to a public discussion of CRPD rights and their implementation taking place at the Weldon Law Building, Dalhousie University, on the evening of Wednesday, March 6th, 2013, starting at 7 pm. A panel of distinguished speakers with a wealth of expertise in the field of CRPD rights will share their knowledge, and lend their perspectives to what we hope will be an engaging and informative discussion. 

In an effort to ensure this event is as accessible and inclusive as possible, CART and sign language interpretation will be provided. An accessible entrance is located on Edward Street. 

For more information, please contact Melissa Brayley at 424-4971.

How Time Flies Crawls

Does anyone recall back in 2008 when I mentioned that the United Way of Halifax was putting out the call for a 211 service in the province?

211 is personal telephone access to information about the full range of social services offered in a local community. It is especially valuable to seniors, newcomers and persons with disabilities trying to navigate the maze of services delivered by multiple levels of government and private providers.

Today residents in large cities like Toronto, Edmonton and Calgary, as well as smaller cities such as Windsor, Niagara Falls and Simcoe have access to 211, 24-7. Callers always talk to people and never a machine. Three more 211 initiatives will launch in 2008 in Ottawa, Thunder Bay and Quebec City. The premier of British Columbia has recently announced the commitment to the first provincewide 211 service in the throne speech.

How about in 2009 when we discussed Aliant agreeing to sponsor such a service and then Nova Scotia Minister Jamie Muir wanting to see more money from proponents on the table so the province wouldn't have to go it alone on the operating costs?

Or, for you relative newcomers to the blawg (or those with shorter memories), how about in 2011 when the government finally agreed to provide $585,000 to establish the system, along with some additional operational funding?

Well, I just thought I would let you know that what some might have thought was actually accomplished back in 2011 has finally come to fruition ... as in .... IT'S HERE! *

Families now have a single point of access to more than 3,000 government, community and social programs provincewide, thanks to government investment in the new 211 information and referral system, which went live on February 11. 

.  .  . 

"With the launch of 211, we've reached a major milestone on the path to connecting Nova Scotians with the community and social services they need, as soon as they need them," said Chuck Hartlen, chair of the 211 Nova Scotia board and senior vice-president, customer experience, Bell Aliant. "Whether it's through 211's highly trained information specialists or the website, the service offers access to the most thorough database of community and socials services in Nova Scotia.

.  .  . 

211 is available in English, French and a variety of other languages, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. Nova Scotians can access 211 by phone, email at info@ns.211.ca, or online at www.ns.211.ca.

You can read the whole thing here.

*Only 5 years later

Mark Start Your Calenders Engines

As you're no doubt aware, I have been offering presentations on various legal-related disability issues for a few years now.

It all started when, as I was in the process of creating the Nova Scotia Legal Guardianship Kit, it quickly became painfully obvious how few families really understood the differences between guardianship, powers of attorney and personal directives.

The need that I had identified (and which led to the creation of the Guardianship Kit) was so much greater than *just* being unable afford a lawyer in order to commence a guardianship application. There wasn't just a cost issue, there was a true information deficit.

Many years ago, someone explained to me that "there's what you know, there's what you don't know and there's what you don't know you don't know." I pondered that for a while and soon cam to realize how true it is. I also came to realize that, sadly, it's what you don't know that you don't know that is the real killer.

For example, lawyers are not taught everything there is too know about the law - it would be physically impossible to fit that much information into our little pea brains. What we are taught, beyond some basics, is where and how to find the answers to legal questions. In other words, we're taught the legal research skills needed to find the answers to those things we don't already know.

All of which is all fine and good, but what happens if a lawyer (or anyone else, for that matter) misses a potential issue? Just who is going to research the answer to a question that they don't even realize exists?

"But what does this have to do with my presentations?" you ask.

Well, I realized that not only did families need information about the different legal options available to support an adult with an intellectual disability but there was a host of other things they needed to know about - things that, in many cases, they didn't even know existed.

Two examples? The Henson Trust and the RDSP. The Henson Trust, by the way, is a particularly good example because for far too many families, no one even realizes there is an issue until the parents have died and it is too late.

And that, my friends, is what led me to the creation of the two other presentations I offer; namely, "Protecting Your Child's Financial Future" and "Government Money Most Families Leave on the Table".

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~  ~

All this to explain to you why I am so pleased to be offering, for the first time ever, all three presentations together in a one-day workshop this Saturday, Feb. 9th, in Truro.  

The event is being sponsored by Parents Supporting Parents and pre-registration is required by emailing parentssupportingparents@;live.ca or phoning 641-2020. There is a minimum donation of $5 per person to Bright Skies Day Camp for Kids with Special Needs (which, by the way, I thought was a very nice touch) and you can get more information by visiting my FaceBook page.

But the reason I am so happy to be offering all three presentations in one workshop is because there is a fair bit overlap between the topics - for example, the Henson Trust comes up in both the "Government Money Most Families Leave on the Table" and the "Understanding the Legal Options Available to Support an Adult with an Intellectual Disability" presentations and the subject of guardianship comes up in both  "Protecting Your Child's Financial Future" and "Government Money Most Families Leave on the Table", all of which can be more than a little confusing for audience members when a related yet unfamiliar topic arises during a presentation but I only have time to explain it in a very limited way.

And all this takes me to my next question - "Will I see you there?".

I hope so.