Evidence of meeting #53 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was families.
A recording is available from Parliament.
9:35 a.m.
Senior Health Policy Analyst, Canadian Cancer Society
I will let Ms. Davis answer this. I work in the area of cancer. She is in a better position to talk about scoliosis or other illnesses.
9:35 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Paediatric Society
That's exactly why we would welcome the opportunity to work on the definition of what would include gravely ill, to really make sure we consider all of the situations. Certainly, there's no question that cancer means that a child is, unfortunately, gravely ill, but there are a number of other genetic conditions, orthopedic conditions...and that's where we need to work to make sure that this, in our opinion, benefits the majority of parents.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
In the case of a missing or deceased child, the person is required to have accumulated at least $6,500 in revenue. If the person has low wages, they will have to work much longer to earn that amount of money. Do you think that situation is fair? Shouldn't the eligibility be based on the number of hours worked, rather than on the amount earned?
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I am talking about children who die or go missing.
9:35 a.m.
Senior Health Policy Analyst, Canadian Cancer Society
I have no idea. I am here to talk about benefits for parents of gravely ill children. I think you are asking me a question that has more to do with murdered children....
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
That's okay.
Ms. Davies, is that also the case for you?
9:35 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Paediatric Society
Unfortunately, I'm in the same boat, being from a health care organization.
9:35 a.m.
NDP
Anne-Marie Day NDP Charlesbourg—Haute-Saint-Charles, QC
I have another question.
Let's take the example of a child under 18 and a disabled person who is 24 years of age or older. Is there a difference when it comes to accessibility?
9:35 a.m.
Senior Health Policy Analyst, Canadian Cancer Society
Are you talking about the new benefits?
9:35 a.m.
Senior Health Policy Analyst, Canadian Cancer Society
According to what I know of the current system, if someone has a disabled child who is 24 years of age or older, they receive all the benefits for disabled children. The new special benefits, on the other hand, will aim to protect parents' employment at specific times, during crisis periods, when a child is gravely ill or has suffered a serious accident.
Is that the same thing? A disability requires long-term daily care. The benefits are intended for times of crisis. I don't think that employment insurance is the best tool for helping those families.
October 30th, 2012 / 9:35 a.m.
Conservative
Kellie Leitch Conservative Simcoe—Grey, ON
Thank you very much, and my thanks to all the witnesses for coming today. I particularly appreciate your time, and also, Ms. Kittmer, your personal story.
Like my colleagues, I want to thank the opposition for their support of this bill. Our intent is to do this expediently so that families have access to these benefits as soon as possible.
I'm a pediatric orthopedic surgeon, so I have some idea of what each of you has spoken about. I've met families in circumstances similar to yours, Ms. Kittmer, and these circumstances were very challenging to deal with as a physician.
The intent behind this legislation is to help make the family unit more cohesive in dealing with this problem. I think you all understand that the focus is on the child and the family when these things happen. You want to make sure that all those other extraneous things are put to the side.
I was wondering, Ms. Davis and Ms. Page, if you have some specific examples of families that you think would be beneficiaries of this type of critically ill issue. Ms. Davis, to the point you made before, just so that you are aware, the definition of “critically ill” is quite clear and it is made by a subspecialist, an ICU intensivist, or a traumatologist. So it will be very clear-cut, and it will enable things to move through expediently, as opposed to the previous definition of “gravely ill”.
Maybe you could each make a comment and give an example of a family.
9:40 a.m.
Executive Director, Canadian Paediatric Society
Many of our members don't work in an area where there is a large pediatric centre. There are only 16 across the country.
I'll use the example of our president, Andrew Lynk, who is a community pediatrician in Cape Breton. When he first sees a family in this situation, he probably will send them down to IWK, and he'll want them to go as a family. Maybe they'll just be there for an afternoon, but depending on the complexity of the situation, they may be there for a month or two for diagnosis and original treatment. He knows that it's very important for the family to be together during those times to make the decisions and to support the child. Once the child gets back to Cape Breton, they may be well enough to go to school for a while and then they may have a relapse. The child may stay in Cape Breton or go to IWK, but it's important for the family to be there and participate in the care.
I mentioned this briefly when I spoke.... One big difference for children and youth, as opposed to adults, is that up until they're capable of consenting to their own health care, it is the parent who needs to be there. These decisions can't wait until five o'clock when somebody gets off work. They need to be made at 10 o'clock in the morning, if that's when a procedure needs to be done. So not only is it important from a psychological point of view, but it's very important from a health care delivery point of view that the parents are available.
9:40 a.m.
NDP
The Vice-Chair NDP Chris Charlton
Thank you very much.
I'm sorry, but we have to move on.
Mr. Cuzner, perhaps you want to follow up.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
No, but I have something I'd like to ask.
Ms. Page, how long have you been with the Canadian Cancer Society?
9:40 a.m.
Senior Health Policy Analyst, Canadian Cancer Society
I have been working at the Ottawa office for five years, and I spent two years before that at the Quebec Division.
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
Do you remember a piece of private member's legislation that would have been brought forward by my former roommate and colleague, Mark Eyking?
9:40 a.m.
Liberal
Rodger Cuzner Liberal Cape Breton—Canso, NS
It extended the health benefits from 15 weeks to 52 weeks for those experiencing health problems such as cancer or transplants. It received a ringing endorsement from the Cancer Society and the Heart and Stroke Foundation, but the bill was defeated in committee by the Conservatives at the time.
As I listen to your compelling story, Ms. Kittmer, and the distress that you would have experienced through that, I can see that a bill like that would be more supportive or a little bit easier to work with than this.
How do you see this legislation? Is it the stacking provisions that you see as being of benefit for the duration? How do you see it playing out?
9:40 a.m.
As an Individual
I see the stacking as very helpful. I'd like anything that would lengthen the 50 weeks of maternity and parental leave. I didn't get the maternity leave while I was on it; I was sick most of the time. The stacking would have given me time, when I was healthy, to have my parental leave.