ISSN 1329-2080
Copyright Guardianship Tribunal 2004.
Guardianship Tribunal
2a Rowntree Street
(Locked Bag 9)
Balmain NSW 2041
This report is copyright. People or organisations wishing to reproduce any part of this
report must obtain permission from the Guardianship Tribunal.
Editor: Anita Ray
Layout and design: Anita Ray
Photography: Martin Brady
Printed by: Robert Burton Printers
The Hon. Carmel Tebbutt, MLC
Minister for Disability Services
Level 25, 9 Castlereagh Street
Sydney NSW 2000
Dear Minister,
I have pleasure in presenting the Annual Report for the Guardianship Tribunal for
the year ended 30 June 2003, in accordance with the Annual Reports (Statutory Bodies)
Act 1984.
Yours sincerely
Nick O’Neill
President, Guardianship Tribunal
The Guardianship Tribunal must observe the principles in the
Guardianship Act 1987. These principles state that everyone dealing with
people with a disability should:
The financial year 2003/2004 has been the biggest year yet for the Guardianship Tribunal. During that time, the Tribunal received the greatest number of applications for a year—4,430—while, at the same time, conducting the greatest number of hearings, 3,871, and resolving many of the applications by other means. During the year, our enquiry service dealt with the greatest number of logged calls —13,316. At the same time, we introduced a new website, launched by the Minister responsible for the Tribunal, the Honourable Carmel Tebbutt, whose support of the Tribunal is appreciated greatly. The Tribunal played a major role in the development of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003, which came into force on 16 February 2004. This Act gave the Tribunal significant new jurisdiction to deal with problems arising from the making, operation and effect of enduring powers of attorney.
Also during the year, we continued to improve our processes of getting matters to hearing in a timely but well-prepared manner. We advanced the long-term project of using the new capabilities created by information technology to streamline the administrative processes of the Tribunal, reduce the amount of repetitive work by automating some processes, and increase the access to and the effective usability of information held in the Tribunal’s databases.
These matters are taken up elsewhere in the report. In the last 15 years there has been a growing confidence in tribunals generally and the Guardianship Tribunal in particular. The Guardianship Tribunal does its work excellently. Parties and other interested persons are assisted by the Tribunal’s staff to understand the nature of the proceedings they are involved in so that they can obtain the relevant report evidence and provide their own evidence to the hearing.
The hearing panels of the Tribunal conduct their proceedings in an informal way, questioning those attending in order to draw out relevant evidence and relevant opinions about what should be done in the best interests of the person with a disability that the hearing is about. The Tribunal members and staff are committed to ensuring the procedures they follow result in a fair hearing in each case.
The overwhelming majority of those attending the hearings of the Tribunal are happy with the outcome. The Supreme Court has made almost no criticisms about how the Tribunal conducts its proceedings and it has upheld its approach to obtaining the views of the person the hearing is about in the absence of other parties and witnesses. The Administrative Decisions Tribunal has sent back for re-hearing only three matters appealed to it.
Despite its efforts, along with others, to encourage people to plan ahead and appoint their own enduring guardians and attorneys, the Guardianship Tribunal’s application rate is steadily growing, up 5.5 percent in 2003/2004. The Tribunal spent $7.3 million to conduct its operations in 2003/2004.
The now established and well-based confidence in the Tribunal will mean that, from time to time, it will be given new jurisdiction. However, its central expertise is hearing and determining applications and reviews relating to people with decision-making disabilities. Its jurisdiction should be limited to matters where a person with a disability is at the centre of the issues under consideration.
In response to the unavoidable growth in its workload, the Tribunal will continue its policy of continuous improvement, ensuring its processes are as efficient as possible in getting matters to hearing in a timely but appropriately prepared manner. It will continue to take advantage of developments in information technology to streamline and cheapen its processes so that the financial resources given to the Tribunal by the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care will be used as efficiently and as effectively as possible.
Its commitment to membership training and a steady turnover of members will ensure a vigorous, well-trained, experienced and expert group of members to conduct hearings that are procedurally fair but deliver well-considered outcomes to ensure that the welfare and interests of the person with a disability are properly provided for.
I have been President of the Guardianship Tribunal for 10 years now. In all, I have served over 15 years as either President or Deputy President of the Tribunal. I have had the honour of deciding when to leave the Tribunal. I have chosen to go at the end of 2004. While I am happy with my decision, I will be sad to leave behind so many fine colleagues who make up the membership and the staff of the Tribunal. In my 15 years, I have learnt so much from them in terms of their professional expertise, their wisdom borne out of their life experience and their commitment to improving the lives of people with disabilities unable to make decisions for themselves.
While I have had the opportunity to play a central role in the establishment and development of the Tribunal over that period, I would not have succeeded in my task without the expertise, contribution and commitment of all those who have been members of the Tribunal or members of its staff during that time. It has been a great privilege to have been their leader for the last 10 years.
Nick O’Neill
President
The 2003/2004 financial year was the 15th year of the Tribunal’s operation. It is appropriate to review the Tribunal’s development and achievements over that period.
The legislation establishing the Guardianship Tribunal, then known as the Guardianship Board, came into force on 1 August 1989. That legislation was the Disability Services and Guardianship Act 1987, the name of which was changed to the Guardianship Act 1987 in April 1993. The Tribunal also had jurisdiction given to it by the Protected Estates Act 1983.
In 1984, a working party was established to develop a proposal for new guardianship legislation in NSW. This followed an international trend towards modern, flexible guardianship laws but it was also a response to the serious concerns that then existed about the inappropriate use of mental health laws to obtain care and treatment for people with an intellectual disability, brain damage, dementia and other non-psychiatric conditions. The legislation, in the form of the Disability Services and Guardianship Act 1987, was enacted on the initiative of the then Labor Government but with the support of all major political parties.
The work of creating the Tribunal as an operating organisation began in January 1989, after the election of the Greiner Coalition Government, with the appointment of Roger West as its first President. I was appointed its first Deputy President in April 1989. Jenny Owen was the Tribunal's first Registrar and first staff member. She commenced duties in 1988 and conducted the administrative work that led to the appointment of Roger West as President. During 1989, key leadership positions were established and filled. Janene Cootes and Barbara Squires became the Tribunal's first two social workers, the forerunners of what is now the Coordination and Investigation Unit and Lesley McGowan was appointed Deputy Registrar. As a management group, we began to develop the processes for handling the Tribunal's caseload.
Roger West and I played a key role in the recruitment of the part-time presiding, professional and community members of the Tribunal by calling for expressions of interest, interviewing many of those who expressed interest and by recommending to the Tribunal's then Minister, the Honourable Virginia Chadwick, a number of people to be appointed to the Tribunal by the Governor. (For more detail on the early history of the Tribunal, see 'Getting started', Guardianship Board NSW, The First Two Years, August 1991, pp. 7-8.)
The Tribunal's first headquarters was 'Bidura', the Victorian mansion in Glebe Point Road, Glebe, designed and built by the famous colonial architect Edmund Blackett. Because the Tribunal grew quickly and needed more hearing rooms and more space for staff than available at 'Bidura', it moved in January 1992 to its present premises in Balmain.
When the Guardianship Tribunal began operations, its jurisdiction related to guardianship orders and it had the role (which it continues to have today) of acting as a substitute decision-maker for medical and dental treatment when a person unable to give a valid consent to their own treatment has no 'person responsible' to act as their substitute decision-maker. At this time, the Tribunal could only deal with applications for financial management orders if a guardianship order was also applied for in relation to the same person. That requirement was dropped in 1994 when amendments to the Protected Estates Act 1983 came into force to allow the Tribunal to deal with applications for either guardianship or financial management orders or both in relation to a person with decision-making disabilities.
This change to the Tribunal's legislation was one of the improvements made by the Guardianship (Amendment) Act 1993 which came into force on 1 February 1994 after being enacted on a bipartisan basis. That Act also improved Part 5 of the Guardianship Act dealing with substitute consent to medical and dental treatment, in particular by clarifying and extending the definition of 'person responsible'.
Early in 1994, Roger West was appointed Commissioner for Community Services and I became Acting President. My appointment as President of the Tribunal was confirmed in August 1994. Marion Brown was appointed the Tribunal's second Deputy President in May 1995.
In October 1994, the Mental Health Act 1990 came into force, giving the Guardianship Tribunal the jurisdiction to give or withhold its approval of any application made by a person's guardian to have the person under guardianship admitted to a psychiatric hospital as an informal patient. The Tribunal has been called upon to exercise this jurisdiction regularly. In 1996, the Tribunal discovered that it had been given jurisdiction under the Adoption Information Amendment Act 1995. That Act commenced 1 September 1996. The Tribunal has rarely been asked to exercise its jurisdiction in relation to adoption information directions.
The Tribunal's workload increased rapidly in its early years as manifested by the number of hearings the Tribunal conducted. The Tribunal conducted just under 2,000 hearings in 1991/1992. This increased to over 3,500 by 1995/1996. Since that time, it has increased steadily to 3,871 in 2003/2004.
As the Guardianship Tribunal's workload continued to increase, I took the initiative to commence the process which led to the introduction of enduring guardianship in New South Wales and played a substantial part in the development of the legislation. By appointing an enduring guardian, an adult with capacity can decide whom they want to make personal or lifestyle decisions for them if they should become incapable of making those decisions for themselves. The idea was well supported and the Guardianship Amendment Act 1997 providing for it passed through Parliament on a bipartisan basis. The legislation allows a person to give directions to their enduring guardian and this can be a form of advance directive about the health care the person wishes to receive if they lose the capacity to make those decisions for themselves.
Appointments of enduring guardianship are now regularly made. When people are planning ahead and getting their affairs in order, they are encouraged to appoint enduring guardians and attorneys under enduring powers of attorney as well as making or revising their wills and, if they wish, to make advance health care directives.
In the same legislation that came into force on 2 February 1998, the Guardianship Board became the Guardianship Tribunal and was given greater flexibility as to the financial management orders it could make. The provisions giving the Tribunal jurisdiction to make financial management orders was transferred from the Protected Estates Act to the Guardianship Act.
At this time, legislation was proposed to give the Tribunal a protective role to ensure that those unable to give a valid consent to their own treatment could not be included in a clinical trial unless that clinical trial was first approved by the Guardianship Tribunal. The Tribunal could not give its approval unless it was satisfied that a range of safeguards had been met. This legislation was seen by some as controversial and was referred to the Standing Committee on Social Issues of the Legislative Council of the New South Wales Parliament. That bipartisan committee conducted a public enquiry and then recommended unanimously that the legislation be enacted (Report No 13, Standing Committee on Social Issues, Legislative Council, New South Wales Parliament, Clinical Trials and Guardianship: Maximising the Safeguards, September 1997). It was enacted with bipartisan support as the Guardianship Amendment Act 1998. The Guardianship Tribunal is required to report annually in its annual report on the clinical trials it has approved in the previous year.
As from 18 December 2000, the Tribunal has had jurisdiction to deal with applications for consent to the sterilisation of children and associated matters under the Children and Young Persons (Care and Protection) Act 1998.
On 16 February 2004, as a result of the Green Paper on Powers of Attorney issued in 1999 on the initiative of Tony Lamb of what is now called Land and Property Information, and with input from other officers of that agency, particularly Alan King, the Public Trustee of NSW, the Attorney General's Department and the Tribunal's Deputy President, Marion Brown, and myself, the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 came into force. That Act provides new rules for the making of powers of attorney that give increased protection to those who make enduring powers of attorney and subsequently lose capacity. The Act also gives the Guardianship Tribunal jurisdiction to review the making, operation and effect of enduring powers of attorney. A more detailed description of the operation of the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 is set out in the Legislation relating to the Guardianship Tribunal section.
In early 2000, the Tribunal introduced its electronic client management system which greatly enhanced its ability to carry out many of its operations electronically, such as the scheduling of hearings, the production of documents including notices of hearing, orders and reasons for decision. The Tribunal has continued to automate as many of its administrative processes as possible as advances in information technology have made this possible.
The guardianship system in New South Wales has been the model for guardianship systems introduced in at least two other places. In 1998, Hong Kong introduced a guardianship system based on the New South Wales model and invited the then Director of the Office of the Public Guardian, John LeBreton, and myself to Hong Kong to train the members of the Guardianship Board there and the social workers and doctors likely to be making use of that Board's services. We provided that training in April 1999.
In 2000, the legislation creating the Guardianship and Administration Tribunal of Queensland was enacted based on the guardianship legislation of New South Wales. I provided to the first members of the Guardianship and Administration Tribunal of Queensland in 2000.
In 1993, together with the President of the Guardianship and Management of Property Tribunal in the Australian Capital Territory, Ron Cahill, and the then Public Guardian of Western Australia, Imelda Dodds, I set up the Interjurisdictional Committee, now known as the Australian Guardianship and Administration Committee. That Committee comprises the heads of the Guardianship Boards and Tribunals, the Public Advocates and Public Guardians and the Public or State Trustees of each state and territory and the Protective Commissioner of New South Wales.
One of the roles of the Committee has been to encourage each state and territory to recognise the appointments of guardians and financial managers of the other states and territories and to allow those appointed as enduring guardians or their equivalents or attorneys under and enduring power of attorney to be recognised in the other states and territories of Australia. New South Wales has taken a lead in this matter. The Guardianship Amendment Act 1997 and subsequent regulations have provided for the recognition in New South Wales of guardians and financial managers appointed by the guardianship boards and tribunals in other states and territories in Australia, and by the Family Court in New Zealand.
The Guardianship Amendment Act 2002 and subsequent regulations provide for the recognition of enduring guardians or their equivalents, appointed under the laws of other states and territories to be recognised in New South Wales. Similarly, the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 provides for the recognition in New South Wales of enduring powers of attorney made in other states and territories.
In the last 15 years, the Guardianship Tribunal has regularly been consulted by other government agencies on issues relevant to its jurisdiction. These issues include medical and dental consent matters, advance directives, decision-making at the end of life, behaviour management and medication for behavioural control and sterilisation of adults and children. The Tribunal has played an important support role in relation to the government's policy of encouraging senior citizens and others, through the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care, to plan ahead against the possibility of them losing decision-making capacity.
Commencing in 1989, the President, Deputy President and staff of the Tribunal have played a major role in promoting awareness and understanding of the role of the Guardianship Tribunal, the associated bodies and other matters of importance in the lives of adults with decision-making disabilities. To this end, the Tribunal has developed a website which is both comprehensive and accessible to people with disabilities. The Tribunal has organised and run a large number of community sessions over the last 15 years and, in addition, has given hundreds of eduction sessions to other organisations and groups during that time. In 2003/2004, the Tribunal organised five of its own community education sessions and gave 40 other presentations in response to invitations from other organisations.
Through papers presented by either its President or Deputy President, the Tribunal has played an active role in contributing to knowledge and debate about issues relevant to the Tribunal's jurisdiction. Recent examples are papers given to the 29th International Congress on Law and Mental Health held in Sydney in October 2003 and to the 15th World Congress on Medical Law in August 2004. Lists of papers presented on behalf of the Tribunal are set out in its annual reports. The papers presented on behalf of the Tribunal in 2003/2004 are set out in the Papers presented section.
The Tribunal hosted the 2nd National Guardianship Conference in Sydney in July 1993 and co-hosted, with the Office of the Protective Commissioner and Office of the Public Guardian, the 7th National Guardianship Conference in Sydney in October 1999.
The President, Deputy President and Legal Officer of the Tribunal regularly contribute to publications about guardianship and related matters, such as the Law Handbook and the Lawyers Practice Manual.
The Tribunal has made three videos to assist in increasing community knowledge about the Tribunal. The first, For Ankie's Sake, made in 1997, is about the process of making an application to the Tribunal. The second, Substitute Consent, made in 2000, deals with substitute consent to medical and dental treatment. The third, made in 2002, In Their Best Interests, shows in detail the hearing process. All three videos have won awards overseas.
Since its establishment in 1989, the Tribunal has taken seriously the need to train not only its staff but also its members. All members, whether they be presiding, professional or community members, bring significant skills and experience to the Tribunal. However, additional expertise, skill and experience are required by members for the successful handling of hearings as mandated by the Guardianship Act. The Tribunal's proceedings are to be conducted with as little formality and legal technicality and form as the circumstances of the case permit and the Tribunal is entitled to inform itself on any matter in such manner as it thinks fit. However, in doing so, while the Tribunal may be flexible in the procedures it adopts, it must act in a way that is procedurally fair, but also with understanding of and empathy for the anxieties and emotions of those appearing before it. People make applications to the Tribunal or come to hearings to give evidence not for personal gain but because circumstances have arisen that indicate that an order may need to be made in the interests of a person with decision-making disabilities.
The Tribunal has developed a program of regular training. All of its members receive three half-days' and one full-day's training per annum for the purpose of developing and maintaining Tribunal skills and for keeping up-to-date with developments in the major disabilities of those who are the subject of the Tribunal's hearings, namely dementia, intellectual disability, acquired brain damage and psychiatric condition. In addition, all members have at least two days of induction and experience of co-sitting with colleagues from the same category of membership. Presiding members receive extra training, when necessary, concerning new legislation and other relevant legal developments. These training days help build not only collegiality between members but consistency both in the way they conduct hearings and in the decisions they make in relation to individual hearings.
As the workload of the Tribunal grew, so did the membership. At the end of 2003/2004, the Tribunal had 70 members. New appointments since that time have increased the membership to 78 members.
In order to keep its vigour, the Tribunal needs a small but steady stream of new members. However, much of the strength of the Tribunal lies in the expertise of members gained through their years of regular sitting on hearings. Maintaining the balance between the experience and wisdom gained through sitting, and the constant need to inject new knowledge and up-to-date experience into the Tribunal, is a key issue for the leadership of the Tribunal and those who make the final recommendations to the Governor as to who should be members of the Tribunal and how long they serve. I believe that this balance has been achieved in relation to the Guardianship Tribunal.
The standing of the Guardianship Tribunal as one of the leading tribunals in New South Wales was recognised through my becoming the first Convenor of the New South Wales Chapter of the newly formed Council of Australasian Tribunals in 2003.
The Tribunal has developed into a body which has made and continues to make a very significant contribution to the lives of people with disabilities, their families and service providers, not only through its processes of dealing with applications for guardianship, financial management, medical and dental consent, reviews of guardianship and financial management orders, reviews relating to enduring guardians and enduring powers of attorney, but also through its general educational role and its important contribution to policy development. In addition, it contributes to public awareness not only of its work but of matters relevant to its work including, in particular, of the need for people to put in place the arrangements they would like in the event of them losing decision-making capacity.
Nick O'Neill
President
1989
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
New guardianship and financial management applications received
The Guardianship Tribunal consists of two separate groups of people. The first group-the Tribunal staff-are full-time and part-time New South Wales public service employees who manage the day-to-day administration of the Tribunal. As at 30 June 2004, the Tribunal employed 69 staff. The second group-the Tribunal members-are appointed by the Governor on recommendation of the Minister for Disability Services to make decisions at hearings. During 2003/2004, there were 70 Tribunal members, most of whom were available on a part-time basis to attend hearings. The Tribunal staff and members are all experienced people who are committed to promoting the rights of people with disabilities, including making their own decisions wherever possible.
Of the 69 staff, the senior staff person is the Executive Officer/Registrar. The staff and their work are organised into the Executive and four units: Business Services Unit, Coordination and Investigation Unit, Client Information Services Unit, and Hearing Services Unit. Each unit plays an essential role in producing positive outcomes for people with disabilities.
The Tribunal members conduct the hearings and make the determinations. They are appointed on the basis of their significant professional and personal experience with people who have disabilities or their legal skills and experience. Each time a panel of the Tribunal is convened to deal with an application about a person with a disability, it comprises a legal member who presides and two expert members. One expert, the professional member, has experience in the assessment or treatment of adults with disabilities. The other expert, the community member, has experience, usually familial, with people with disabilities. The combination of the three members ensures the Tribunal not only conducts its proceedings fairly, relies on credible evidence and remains within its jurisdiction but also that it focusses on the physical, psychological, social and emotional aspects of the person the hearing is about. This enables the Tribunal to take a holistic approach to its decision-making.
The panel considers the written evidence and takes evidence from the person the hearing is about and other parties and witnesses at the hearing or by telephone or video conference. They keep the hearing relevant, by asking questions and directing the parties and witnesses to the issues being considered. At the end of the hearing, they assess the evidence and decide if there is a need to appoint or reappoint a guardian or a financial manager for the person the hearing is about. The Tribunal members then announce their decision at the end of the hearing and provide written orders and written reasons for their decision within 12 working days. The backgrounds of individual Tribunal members are detailed in the Our People section.
The structure of the Tribunal is based on functional groups. The functional groups are:
In addition, there is a fourth functional group, with a focus on providing the necessary internal supports to allow the other three functional groups to work well. The four functional units, in addition to the Executive Unit, form the organisational structure.
Client Information Services Unit deals with switch, enquiries, receipt of applications and other incoming mail, coordination of feedback and other correspondence, administration of reviews preparation and withdrawals processing, website, publications and community education.
Coordination and Investigation Unit deals with assessment, investigation and preparation of all new and review cases for hearing.
Hearing Services Unit sets up and supports all hearings, including
Business Services Unit handles human resources, finance and other administrative services, management and support services for information technology, communication and client data base systems, and training and development for staff and members.
The Guardianship Act 1987 sets out the legislative framework under which guardianship orders can be made, how they operate and how they are reviewed in New South Wales. The Act establishes the Guardianship Tribunal and the Public Guardian and details the role of both institutions. It also provides for the making of appointments of enduring guardianship and for the review of those appointments where necessary.
The Act creates the regime for substitute decision-making in relation to medical and dental consent for those persons 16 years and above unable to give a valid consent to their own treatment. Usually, this consent can be provided by the person's 'person responsible'.
The Guardianship Regulation 2000 should be read in tandem with the Guardianship Act as it contains further provisions about enduring guardians and medical treatment as well as setting out the prescribed forms required by the Guardianship Act.
Both the Guardianship Act and the Protected Estates Act 1983 deal with financial management and the Protective Commissioner. The Guardianship Act deals with the process of making applications for financial management to the Guardianship Tribunal and the Tribunal's authority to make financial management orders.
The Protected Estates Act sets out how financial management orders can be made by the Supreme Court, magistrates and the Mental Health Review Tribunal. The Protected Estates Act sets out the powers of the Protective Commissioner and how estates placed under management by one of these courts or tribunals are to be administered.
The Powers of Attorney Act 2003 came into operation on 16 February 2004. It deals with the making of powers of attorney and gives the Guardianship Tribunal and the Supreme Court detailed jurisdiction to review the making, operation and effect of enduring powers of attorney. The Powers of Attorney Act followed a period of consultation with the community and government representatives about the need to make changes to the power of attorney scheme in New South Wales.
The Act is designed to ensure that solicitors and others qualified to witness the making of an enduring power of attorney satisfy themselves that the person making the power of attorney (the principal) knew what they were doing. The Act also protects the principal by limiting how their attorney may handle their property and financial affairs. In particular, the changes introduced by the new legislation are that:
The Guardianship Tribunal has designed an enduring power of attorney brochure and has an information sheet which reflect these legislative changes. These are also available from this website.
The new Powers of Attorney Act empowers the Guardianship Tribunal, in addition to the Supreme Court, to be able to review and vary an enduring power of attorney. The Tribunal can make a variety of orders regarding the making or operation and effect of an enduring power of attorney. Following the conduct of a review of an enduring power of attorney, the Tribunal can make orders, including orders that:
The Tribunal also has the power to decide that a review of an enduring power of attorney should be treated as an application for financial management. The Tribunal can then proceed on that basis and make a financial management order for the person who made the enduring power of attorney, if appropriate. As has long been provided for under the Protected Estates Act, the making of a financial management order suspends any powers of attorney that have been made by the protected person (the person whose estate is the subject of the order).
The Guardianship Tribunal is a New South Wales Government tribunal established under the Guardianship Act 1987. The principal role of the Guardianship Tribunal is to hear and determine applications made to it for the appointment of guardians and financial managers of adults with decision-making disabilities. The Tribunal also reviews the guardianship orders it makes and may review its financial management orders. It has jurisdiction to give substitute consent to medical and dental treatment and a number of other smaller jurisdictions.
Under the Guardianship Act, the Guardianship Tribunal may conduct proceedings with as little formality and legal technicality and form as the circumstances of the case permit. The legislation also assumes that the Tribunal will operate in a procedurally fair manner. It also provides that the Tribunal may obtain information on any matter in such manner as it thinks fit. The provisions of Part 6 of the Guardianship Act deal with the Tribunal and proceedings before it.
Through the Tribunal's community education programs, its videos and publications, and its enquiry service, the Tribunal educates and informs the community about the work of the Tribunal and various informal arrangements that may overcome the need to make an application or for the Tribunal to make orders.
The Tribunal differs from other courts and tribunals in the kinds of proceedings it hears. In nearly all other courts or tribunals, proceedings involve a dispute between two parties. In most matters coming to the Guardianship Tribunal, there is no dispute. Sometimes, the person with a decision-making disability may not appreciate the need for decisions to be made or actions to be taken in relation to them. Occasionally, there is conflict between those involved about what should be done for the person with disabilities. Only rarely will the conflict be about whether or not the person has lost their decision-making capacity.
Proceedings before the Guardianship Tribunal are about whether a person with a decision-making disability needs a substitute decision-maker and, if so, what powers or functions that substitute decision-maker should have. Proceedings before the Guardianship Tribunal are about a single person and their right to continue to make their own decisions.
In most matters before the Tribunal, the Tribunal's decision affects the person the hearing is about. In some cases, the emotions and interests of other people involved in the hearing are affected as well. For these reasons, the Guardianship Tribunal conducts its hearings differently to other tribunals. The Tribunal operates in an inquisitorial manner. It controls the proceedings by setting out the issues and obtaining the evidence through a series of open questions at the hearing. The Tribunal then considers this evidence along with the report evidence it has received. It determines whether or not the person the hearing is about has lost their decision-making capacity and needs a guardian or financial manager and, if so, who that guardian or financial manager should be and their decision-making functions.
Because of their knowledge of disabilities and the available services, the professional and community members play an essential role in determining whether an order should be made and, if so, what its content should be.
Most people with a disability do not need a guardian or a financial manager. There is no need to contact the Guardianship Tribunal unless there is a breakdown in informal arrangements in caring for a person with a disability or there are no informal arrangements available. Lodging an application for the appointment of a guardian or financial manager for a person with a disability is a serious matter. The person submitting the application is, in effect, asking the Tribunal to take away a person's rights to make their own lifestyle or financial decisions and to give those rights to someone else. Applications can be made to the Tribunal by anyone with a genuine concern for the welfare of the person with a disability. Someone with a genuine concern for the person with a disability may be a family member or a friend or their doctor, caseworker, professional carer or other service provider.
1. need
2. enquiry
Does the Tribunal need to be involved.
Before an application is made, service providers, professionals, family members or friends of the person are encouraged to telephone the Tribunal's enquiry service. This may establish that there are other informal arrangements to assist the person rather than going to hearing. The enquiry service offers advice.
3. application or informal solution
4. registration and assessment
When an application is received, it is registered. This starts a legal process in which the Tribunal has to be satisfied that the welfare and interests of the person with the disability are given paramount consideration. The applicant must demonstrate that it is in the person's best interests before a withdrawal is approved. All applications are assessed for urgency. The welfare and interests of the person are considered.
5. investigation
6. informal solution or preparing for hearing
A staff member of the Coordination and Investigation Unit will contact the applicant, family members and service providers, and, wherever possible, the person who is the subject of the application. After developing an understanding of the situation, the staff member will write a report, outlining the background to the application, any major issues and the views of all the parties. This report provides a summary for the Tribunal members at the hearing. By exploring options on a regular basis with the people involved. This process can help to clarify issues and find satisfactory alternatives to formal guardianship or financial management for the problems they are facing.
7. hearing
Each time a Tribunal is convened, it comprises a legal member, a professional member and a community member. At the hearing, the three Tribunal members consider the evidence and opinions of all parties and determine if a guardian or financial manager or medical consent is needed.
Urgent applications - If necessary, a hearing with a three-member Tribunal can be set up within hours or days of receiving the application. Sometimes these matters need to be dealt with by telephone. This is rare and occurs only in extremely urgent situations.
8. order or dismiss
The Tribunal issues written reasons for decisions relating to each hearing, which set out the Tribunal's decision, the evidence relied upon and the Tribunal's reasoning. The order and reasons for decision are sent to the parties as soon as possible after the hearing. Generally, these documents are finalised and sent within 12 working days after the hearing.
review hearing
discharge
The Tribunal's enquiries service, which operates from 9.00 am to 5.15 pm Monday to Friday, dealt with 13,316 telephone enquiries over the past year, an average of 54 calls daily. The enquiries service is staffed by experienced officers to ensure that the advice provided is always of the highest quality. Because the enquiries service is often busy dealing with several callers at the same time, sometimes callers leave their contact details and their calls are returned within a few hours.
An important function of the enquiries service is to discuss the need for a guardianship or financial management application. In many cases, Tribunal staff will be able to suggest alternatives. For example, a woman had a query about her adult daughter, who had an intellectual disability and resided in a group home. As the daughter required major medical treatment, residential care staff had advised the woman to apply for guardianship. The enquiries staff member reassured the caller that she was able to provide consent herself as her daughter was not objecting to the treatment and the caller qualified as the 'person responsible' in her daughter's life.
In some cases, an informal alternative may not be possible, such as where a property needs to be sold to cover special accommodation needs or medical costs. To make such decisions on behalf of the person with the disability, someone else may need the formal authority of Tribunal orders. Enquiries staff will discuss the particular circumstances with the caller and send the appropriate application forms and information by mail, fax or refer callers to the Tribunal's website, which contains all publications, application forms and an online application.
In 2003/2004, the Tribunal received 4,430 new applications. Of these new applications received, 2,032 (46.0%) were for the appointment of a financial manager; 1,912 (43.1%) were for the appointment of a guardian; 440 (9.9%) were applications for consent to medical treatment; 22 (0.5%) were for the review of an enduring guardianship appointment and 24 (0.5%) were for the review of an enduring power of attorney. Table 1 shows a breakdown of the new applications received this year and a comparison with the two previous years.
Table 1. Categories of new applications: three-year comparison
Guardianship
2001/2002 - 1,745
2002/2003 - 1,809
2003/2004 - 1,912
Financial management
2001/2002 - 1,873
2002/2003 - 1,962
2003/2004 - 2,032
Medical/dental consent
2001/2002 - 449
2002/2003 - 411
2003/2004 - 440
Enduring guardianship
2001/2002 - 8
2002/2003 - 9
2003/2004 - 22
Enduring power of attorney
2001/2002 - n/a
2002/2003 - n/a
2003/2004 - 24
Total
2001/2002 - 4,075
2002/2003 - 4,191
2003/2004 - 4,430
Who made the applications?
Anyone with a genuine concern for the welfare of the person with a disability can make an application to the Tribunal. This genuine concern can arise from being a family member or a friend of the person with the disability or because of a professional relationship with them (eg. their doctor, caseworker, professional carer or other service provider). In 2003/2004, 53.8 percent of the applications received were made by family members, friends, advocates or self-applicants. The rest were made by professionals, such as social workers, case managers, doctors or residential care staff.
Primary disability of new clients
As in previous years, the most common primary disability identified on new clients where orders were made was dementia (48.3 %). The next most common types of disabilities identified were mental illness (14.5%) and intellectual disability (13.7%). Table 2 and shows a breakdown of the disability types of new clients.
Table 2: New clients by disability type in 2003/2004
Dementia
Number - 1,072
Percent (%) - 48.3
Mental illness
Number - 322
Percent (%) - 14.5
Intellectual disability
Number - 305
Percent (%) - 13.7
Other
Number - 140
Percent (%) - 6.3
Stroke
Number - 132
Percent (%) - 5.9
Alcohol/drug related
Number - 107
Percent (%) - 4.8
Brain injury
Number - 131
Percent (%) - 5.9
Eating disorder
Number - 6
Percent (%) - 0.3
Unknown
Number - 5
Percent (%) - 0.2
Total
Number - 2,220
Percent (%) - 100.0
Age and sex
Of the new orders made, 47 percent related to men and 53 percent to women. Unlike last year when the majority of orders made relating to people over the age of 65 were for men, this year the female subjects in this age group exceeded the men (61.6 % for women and 38.4 % for men). For people under 65 years, 61.6 percent of the orders made related to men.
Cultural background
Orders were made about people with a wide range of cultural backgrounds. Applicants are asked to identify the cultural background of the person the application is about. The most frequent of these were Italian, Polish, Aboriginal/Torres Strait Islander, Greek, German, Russian, Dutch, Lebanese and Hungarian.
Language spoken at home
Information was also provided by applicants about the language spoken at home by the person with the disability. A total of 43 languages other than English were identified, including Aboriginal languages and Auslan (Australian sign language). Italian, Polish, Greek, German, Russian and Arabic were the most frequently nominated languages other than English.
Interpreters used
Where appropriate, the Tribunal provides interpreters to assist people attending hearings. Interpreters were provided on 199 occasions during the year across 41 different languages. Interpreters for Arabic, Cantonese, Croatian, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian, Macedonian, Mandarin, Polish, Russian, Serbian, Spanish, and Ukrainian were provided on five or more occasions. Auslan (Australian sign language) interpreters were provided on six separate occasions during the year. Also, where appropriate, the Tribunal will arrange for documents to be translated into other languages and Braille.
Guardianship
In 2203/2004, the Tribunal received 1,912 new guardianship applications and finalised 1,759 new guardianship matters. Of the matters dealt with at hearings, 1,371 resulted in orders being made, including 166 adjourned matters and 554 matters were finalised without requiring a hearing.
The outcomes for guardianship matters finalised at hearings:
withdrawn - 12%
dismissed - 20%
adjourned - 12%
non-reviewable - 5%
orders made - 51%
Of the 41 percent of applications that resulted in a guardianship order being made, private guardians were appointed in 40.3 percent of the cases and the Public Guardian in 58.0 percent. In the remaining 1.7 percent, a private guardian was appointed for some functions and the Public Guardian for other functions.
Financial management
In 2003/2004, the Tribunal received 2,032 new financial management applications and finalised 1,891 financial management matters. Of the matters dealt with at hearings 1,743 resulted in orders being made, including 341 adjourned matters, and 489 matters were finalised without requiring a hearing. Of the matters finalised at hearings, 59.5 percent resulted in a financial management order and 39.5 percent were withdrawn, dismissed or adjourned.
Outcomes for financial management matters finalised at hearings:
withdrawn - 6%
dismissed - 11%
adjourned - 19%
orders made - 64%
Of the 59.5 percent of matters where financial management appointments were made, 79 percent resulted in final financial management orders; 13 percent had a review period stipulated in the order and 8 percent were interim financial orders.
A total of 440 applications for consent to medical or dental treatment were received by the Tribunal during the year and 426 matters were finalised at hearings and 34 matters were finalised without requiring a hearing.
Hearing outcomes for medical and dental consent matters:
withdrawn - 2%
dismissed - 7%
adjourned - 3%
consent refused - 1%
consent given - 87%
The Tribunal received 22 applications to review the appointment of enduring guardians during the year. Eighteen of these matters were heard with five enduring guardianship appointments confirmed, seven matters adjourned, one matter withdrawn and five appointments revoked when guardianship orders were made in their place.
On 16 February 2004, the Powers of Attorney Act 2003 came into force, giving the Tribunal the jurisdiction to review the making, operation and effect of enduring powers of attorney.
The Tribunal received 24 applications to review enduring powers of attorney or seek advice and directions on the operation of enduring powers of attorney. Nine of these matters were heard with five reviews being dismissed, one matter adjourned with orders, one matter withdrawn and two matters where multiple orders were issued.
Reviews of guardianship orders
Most guardianship orders are reviewed at the end of their terms. They may be reviewed on request during their term. Requested reviews are usually made by guardians to increase or vary the guardianship functions. Others may also request a review because the circumstances relating to the person under guardianship have changed significantly or because of some other new issue relating to the guardian.
The Tribunal finalised 1,689 reviews of guardianship matters during the year. Of these, 1,448 orders were made following a hearing and 241 matters were finalised without requiring a hearing.
Outcomes for reviews of guardianship orders finalised at hearings:
renewed - 16%
dismissed/withdrawn - 12%
adjourned - 6%
non-reviewable - 2%
not renewed - 32%
renewed & varied - 51%
In 16 percent of matters, the guardianship order was renewed; in 42 percent of matters the order was renewed and varied; while in 32 percent of matters the order was not renewed as it was determined that there was no longer a need for an order.
Reviews of financial management orders
The Tribunal finalised 370 reviews of financial management orders during 2003/2004. Of these, 135 matters were applications to revoke financial management orders on the grounds of regained capacity or best interests. Sixty-four of these orders were revoked.
The Tribunal also received 100 applications to replace the current financial manager. These applications were made for a variety of reasons, including that the manager no longer wanted to or was unable to carry on with this role, or when there were concerns raised about the manager's suitability. Fifty-nine appointed managers were replaced during the year. In 61 percent of these cases, the Protective Commissioner was appointed in place of a private manager.
How many hearings were held?
During the year, the Tribunal conducted 3,871 scheduled hearings over 998 scheduled sittings. Of the scheduled sittings 51.5 were half-day sittings. This was an average of 4.09 hearings per sitting. In addition to this, the Tribunal conducted 36 hearings after hours. Together, a total of 3,907 scheduled and after-hours hearings were held during the year.
Where were the hearings held?
The Tribunal conducted approximately 73 percent of its hearings either at its Balmain premises or in the Sydney metropolitan area. The remaining 27 percent of hearings were conducted elsewhere in NSW. Of these, 34 percent were held in either Newcastle or the Central Coast. Table 3 shows a breakdown of the major hearing locations.
Table 3: Hearings conducted outside Sydney metropolitan area
Albury, Armidale, Bathurst, Bega, Blue Mountains, Bowral, Broken Hill, Central Coast, Cessnock, Coffs Harbour, Dubbo, Goulburn, Griffith, Lismore, Maitland, Merimbula, Morisset, Newcastle, Nowra, Orange, Parkes, Port Macquarie, Queanbeyan, Stockton, Tamworth, Taree, Tweed Heads, Ulladulla, Wagga Wagga, Wollongong
Table 4: Hearings and sittings by location
Balmain
Hearings - 2,477
Sittings - 587
Sydney Metrpolitian
Hearings - 360
Sittings - 108
Newcastle
Hearings - 171
Sittings - 53
Central Coast
Hearings - 180
Sittings - 49
Wollongong
Hearings - 107
Sittings - 28
Other country
Hearings - 576
Sittings - 173
Sub-total
Hearings - 3,871
Sittings - 998
After hours
Hearings - 39
Sittings - 32
Total
Hearings - 3,907
Sittings - 1,030
Procedural hearing
The Tribunal is able to determine some procedural matters with less than three members. In 2003/2004, the Tribunal conducted 197 procedural hearings. These matters were determined by either the President or Deputy President and included applications for legal representation, applications to be joined as a party, and requests for withdrawal of some matters. Of the 115 applications for legal representation considered, representation was granted on 99 occasions.
The Tribunal has the jurisdiction to recognise the appointment of guardians and managers appointed under corresponding law in other states and territories. The Tribunal is able to recognise appointments made by relevant guardianship bodies in all Australian states and territories and in New Zealand. During 2003/2004, the Tribunal received 15 applications to recognise such appointments.
As part of the development of its Corporate Plan in 2002, the Tribunal established a three-year focus to 'improve our services and our service quality'. Major projects, that are helping to achieve this focus, have been undertaken and were either completed or substantially completed during the 2003/2004 year.
This project commenced in March 2003, with funding from the Office of Information Technology. The project consisted of three components. The main component involved the development of a new website for the Tribunal, which was designed in a way that maximises accessibility to and around the site for people with a range of disabilities. The second component created the ability for people to make applications to the Tribunal online via the new website. The third component of the project enhanced the ability of the Tribunal to exchange information and data electronically with its key partner agencies.
In February 2004, the Minister launched the Tribunal's new website and, by the end of June 2004, there had been in excess of 27,000 visits to the site and more than 130 online applications submitted. The Tribunal is very pleased with its new website as it greatly improves access to information about the Tribunal and is a significant part of the Tribunal's strategic direction towards increased use of the available technology to improve its service provision. A more detailed description of the website's content and visitor usage can be found in the Website section.
As part of its Corporate Plan strategy to actively identify new ways to use information technology in its business, the Tribunal commissioned an Information Technology Plan. This was completed in late 2002 and identified the directions and actions that were needed to establish the necessary infrastructure that would allow the Tribunal to appropriately utilise information technology now and into the future. Importantly, this contributed towards the longer-term strategic direction of the Tribunal of greater use of technology in carrying out its day-to-day business to efficiently provide services to its clients.
In September 2003, a project implementation plan was completed that detailed the approach, timelines and costings for the realisation of the strategic Information Technology Plan. Implementation of the Information Technology Plan commenced in late 2003 and was close to finalisation by the end of the 2003/2004 year.
Installation of upgraded hardware, including new servers and new desktop computers for all staff, has provided the Tribunal with the necessary infrastructure to allow it to make the most of the available technology. The Tribunal will continue its progress towards greater use of technology for managing its work and for improving service provision to its clients.
The Tribunal's Case Management System is a database that was custom designed for the Tribunal. It stores data on all Tribunal clients and is used to produce documents in relation to the preparation of applications for hearing and in relation to orders made by the Tribunal. It has been in operation since 1997.
During 2003/2004, a major review of the Case Management System was undertaken in order to implement a revised upgrade that incorporated new and improved functionalities. As the review progressed, it became apparent that further improvements and additions would be required than first identified. However, it was an ideal opportunity to incorporate as many improvements as needed to ensure the final product maximises the ability to provide optimum quality in the Tribunal's work. The new 'core system' of the upgraded Case Management System will be operational by early August 2004 and further improvements will be rolled out over the following three to four months.
The 2003/2004 year saw the consolidation of work processes and systems, arising from the implementation of new structural arrangements in the previous year. The improved structure enabled Tribunal staff to deal successfully with an increased workload, while also contributing to the progress of the major projects and adapting to changes in work practices.
The management of the Tribunal has a responsibility to ensure that the Tribunal is able to deal with its workload in an effective and efficient manner while meeting a high standard of service delivery to its clients. As part of ensuring this, it is critical that the Tribunal's work practices and procedures, relating to the processing of applications as well as other case related and administrative functions, are appropriate, consistent and remain relevant and current. The Tribunal's management has systems in place that facilitate appropriate consultation and communication and that ensure meetings are scheduled to occur regularly throughout the year, in a number of different forums, to consider these issues and make decisions concerning the development of new work practices and procedures or the review and updating of current ones. During 2003/2004, the Tribunal's management held 29 pre-scheduled meetings where issues such as these were dealt with. In addition, the Tribunal's management calls, or is involved in, numerous ad hoc meetings where identified issues need to be discussed and addressed outside of the regular meeting schedule.
New South Wales Government agencies are required to formulate three-yearly disability action plans. The Tribunal's current Disability Action Plan provides a strategic framework with clear goals for improving the accessibility of the Tribunal's services and facilities and for measuring the progress towards those goals.
These major projects identified above contributed to the achievement of improved accessibility for people utilising the Tribunal's services through the establishment of a sound foundation that supports the goals of the Disability Action Plan. Specifically, the GT Connect project provides significant improvements in access to information about the Tribunal, while the Information Technology Plan and Case Management System upgrade provide the base for improving the delivery of the Tribunal's services. In addition, the Tribunal regularly reviews and assesses accessibility to its premises and other venues used for hearings and community education.
The Guardianship Tribunal is committed to ensuring that its services meet the needs of people from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Activities that have occurred over the past year that work towards this commitment include:
Decisions of the Tribunal may be appealed to either the Supreme Court or the Administrative Decisions Tribunal of New South Wales. Only parties to the proceedings before the Guardianship Tribunal can appeal to the Supreme Court or the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The Supreme Court can hear appeals from any decision of the Guardianship Tribunal. The Administrative Decisions Tribunal can only hear appeals from decisions made after 28 February 2003 and there are some decisions, such as decisions about medical treatment, which cannot be appealed to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. There have been 25 appeals to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal from decisions of the Tribunal during 2003/2004 (see Table 5).
Table 5: Appeals to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal
Appeal withdrawn by appellant - 8
Appeal dismissed by ADT - 10
Appeal upheld by ADT - 3
Pending decisions as at 1 July 2004 - 4
Total - 25
The three appeals that were upheld by the Administrative Decisions Tribunal were remitted to the Tribunal for re-hearing. The Administrative Decisions Tribunal did not substitute its decision for that of the Guardianship Tribunal in any of the appeals.
There were two appeals from decisions of the Tribunal lodged with the Supreme Court during 2003/2004. Only one matter has been dealt with by the Court. The other matter is still pending as at 30 June 2004.
W v G [2003] NSWSC 1170, 25 November 2003, (11/03) Windeyer J
Mrs G was said to have a cognitive impairment due to advanced dementia which affected her ability to make decisions. Mrs G resided in a nursing home. Prior to moving to the nursing home, Mrs G had lived in her own home which she shared with her sister. Mrs G's sister lived in a different nursing home which was at least a two-hour drive from Mrs G's nurisng home.
Mrs G's niece, Ms W, had made the decision to place her at the nursing home. Mrs G's sister had a family friend, Mrs M. Ms W's view was that Mrs G should continue to remain in the nursing home. Mrs M's view was that consideration should be given to Mrs G moving to her sister's nursing home so the two sisters could live together.
The Guardianship Tribunal appointed the Public Guardian to make decisions about Mrs G's accommodation and also appointed the Protective Commissioner to make decisions about her finances.
Ms W appealed that decision to the Supreme Court. The appeal was heard 13 months after it was lodged. In the meantime, Mrs G remained in the nursing home where she was placed by Ms W.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and ordered that the guardianship proceedings be re-heard by the Guardianship Tribunal. The Court also ordered that Ms W should be the financial manager subject to the supervision of the Protective Commissioner.
The Court discussed what factors the Guardianship Tribunal should take into account when considering whether to appoint a member of a person's family as a guardian or the Public Guardian.
At the rehearing the Tribunal did not appoint a guardian for Mrs G as her accommodation was settled, she had a person responsible to make substitute medical and dental decisions for her and there did not appear to be any other need for a guardian for her.
The Tribunal received two applications for access to information under the Freedom of Information Act. The first application requested information about a client file relating to a Tribunal hearing. The request was refused on the basis that the Tribunal is not an 'agency' for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act, as section 10 specifies that a tribunal is not included within that definition in relation to its judicial functions. The applicant was informed of this provision and the matter was finalised.
The second application was a request for information about the applicant. However, the Tribunal does not hold any information or records about the applicant. The Tribunal advised the applicant of this. However, as the application was not dealt with within the 28-day period set out in the Freedom of Information Act, the applicant requested an internal review on the basis that there was a deemed refusal of access under section 24(2) of the Act. The applicant was advised the that it was a not a refusal because there were no documents in existence which could be provided. In the circumstances, the Tribunal did not regard the request for an internal review as a valid request under the Freedom of Information Act. Also, it was not accompanied by the relevant fee. The applicant subsequently lodged an application for review to the Administrative Decisions Tribunal. The application was still pending as at 30 June 2004.
Over the past year, the Tribunal received 94 written complaints. The complaints were predominately about decisions made by the Tribunal, or how an investigation or hearing was conducted. Complaints about a decision or conduct of a hearing are handled by the Deputy President while complaints about the investigation are handled by the Manager Coordination and Investigation.
The purpose of the clinical trials provisions of the Guardianship Act 1987 (Part 5, Division 4A) is to ensure that people who cannot consent to their own treatment can gain access to treatment only available through a clinical trial.
To ensure that people who cannot consent to their own treatment may take part only in those clinical trials that may benefit them, the legislation contains a number of safeguards.
The first safeguard is that the Guardianship Tribunal must give its approval to the clinical trial as one in which those who cannot consent to their own treatment may take part. This requires those proposing the clinical trial to make their case to the Tribunal before they can treat adults unable to consent to their own treatment in the clinical trial. The Tribunal will not give its approval unless each of the following criteria is satisfied.
Another safeguard comes into play if the Tribunal gives its approval to the clinical trial. Individual substitute consent must be given for each person taking part in the clinical trial. The legislation is structured so that this consent will usually be given by the 'person responsible' for the person unable to consent to their own treatment. The 'person responsible' is usually the spouse, family carer or adult child of the person unable to give consent. In all cases in which the Guardianship Tribunal has given its approval to a clinical trial, the 'person responsible' has been empowered to give the individual substitute consent for the patient.
A further safeguard in the legislation is that anyone who provides treatment to a person in a clinical trial not in accordance with the legislation commits a serious offence and is liable to imprisonment for up to seven years.
A final safeguard is that the Tribunal must include, in its annual report, details of any clinical trial it approves.
During 2003/2004, the Tribunal received 12 applications for the approval of clinical trials. The Tribunal heard eight of those applications. Seven trials were approved and one was adjourned. One of the applications was withdrawn prior to hearing and three applications are yet to be determined.
Of the hearings conducted, two of the clinical trials were for new treatments for people who had significant impairments resulting from stroke; two were for critically ill patients with sepsis or pneumonia; one was to trial a treatment for people with severe brain injury; and one was to trial gastro-intestinal motility in critically ill patients. Another trial looked at a treatment to prevent thromboembolism while another sought to test a new treatment that may help to reduce some types of acute renal failure for patients in intensive care.
As required by Section 76A (2A) of the Guardianship Act, the Tribunal sets out details of those trials below.
Trials for patients suffering from severe traumatic brain injury
1. DECRA a trial of decompressive craniectomy in patients with severe brain injury
Trial sites
Nepean Hospital
John Hunter Hospital
Westmead Hospital
Liverpool Hospital
Royal North Shore Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Trial approved
Approval of all sites except Royal North Shore which is still to be considered.
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
Trials for patients who have significant disabilities resulting from a stroke
2. Intravenous Repinotan in patients with Acute Ischaemic Stroke
Trial sites
John Hunter Hospital
Gosford Hospital
Prince of Wales Hospital
Royal North Shore Hospital
Mater Misericordiae Hospital, Newcastle
Outcome of Tribunal
All sites approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
3. SAINT - Stroke- Acute- Ischemic NXY treatment
Trial sites
Central Coast Neuroscience Research, Gosford
John Hunter Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Adjourned
Trials for patients with acute sepsis or pneumonia
4. Efficacy of Levosimendan in critically ill patients with unstable hemodynamics
Trial sites
Nepean Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
5. Venticute in patients with pneumonia or aspiration of gastric contents leading to intubation, mechanical ventilation and severe oxygenation impairment
Trial sites
Nepean Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
Trials for patients in intensive care
6. Acetylcystein for prevention in ICU of radiocontrast induced nephropathy (a kind of acute renal failure)
Trial sites
Westmead Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
7. The use of Neostigmine to promote gastro-intestinal motility in critically ill patients
Trial sites
Westmead Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
Approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
Trials for patients at risk of thromboembolism
8. Evaluate safety of Enoxaparin vs unfractionated Heparin in prevention of venous thromboembolism
Trial sites
Gosford Hospital
Royal North Shore Hospital
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
Westmead Hospital
Outcome of Tribunal
All sites approved
Individual consents to be given by the 'person responsible' - Yes
The Tribunal had a very busy 2003/2004 presenting community education sessions to professionals and carers. Throughout the year, the Client Information Services Unit organises community education sessions in different regions of NSW and coordinates guest speakers in response to requests from agencies.
A community education day consists of two sessions. The morning session is open to professionals and community workers involved in the disability and aged care sectors. It provides an overview of the role and function of the Tribunal with an explanation of financial management, guardianship, enduring guardianship, enduring power of attorney and medical and consent orders. The afternoon session covers the same topics as the morning session but on a more informal basis for carers, family and friends.
A total of five all-day seminars were held throughout NSW in 2003/2004. Seminars were held in the Sydney central business district, Wollongong, Gosford, Armidale and Blacktown (western Sydney). These attracted a total of 371 professionals and community workers for the morning sessions and 168 carers for the afternoon sessions.
This year, there has been an increase in the number of carers attending the afternoon sessions. For example, over 70 carers attended the Gosford seminar, almost the same number as the professionals and community workers who attended the morning session.
The Tribunal also provides speakers for agencies that request a speaker. The requests come from a wide range of organisations, including the health and community sector, the nursing home and hostel industry, small non-government agencies (eg. neighbourhood centres), supported accommodation services for people with a disability, and retirement associations. The largest volume of requests this year came from the health sector. Forty requested sessions were delivered throughout the year, attracting a total of 1,140 people. Participants ranged from a volunteer delivering food to elderly people at home to medical staff of an emergency unit of a major hospital.
In summary, the Tribunal spoke to approximately 1,680 people across NSW, from professionals and community workers to carers, friends, family members and parents of people with a disability and elderly person.
Publications are one of the main means of obtaining information about the Tribunal by clients and the general public. The Tribunal produces publications that inform people with disabilities, carers and the public about the Tribunal, its work and alternatives to accessing the Tribunal's services. Publications are distributed through the Tribunal's enquiries service and the website, at community education seminars and requested education sessions, and when requests are made to the Client Information Services Unit.
During 2003/2004, the major focus for publications was to disseminate information about the new legislation, the Powers of Attorney Act, and the Tribunal's increased role in reviewing enduring powers of attorney. Other publications produced during the year promoted the Tribunal's new website and community education. The Tribunal produced seven new publications during the year: Planning Ahead... Enduring Powers of Attorney brochure and application form; Substitute Consent brochure; a flyer promoting the new website; two new information sheets for the new website, Accessibility Features of the New Guardianship Tribunal Website and Online Applications on the New Guardianship Tribunal Website, an information sheet on Reviews of Enduring Powers of Attorney, and the application form Application to Review an Enduring Power of Attorney. Apart from the new publications, the Tribunal produced new versions of a number of publications, including What Does the Guardianship Tribunal Do? brochure and We Welcome Your Feedback brochure.
Over the past year, the Tribunal distributed over 96,000 brochures, application forms and information sheets, which was a decrease of 19 percent compared to 2002/2003. The launch of the new website and the availability of the majority of Tribunal publications and all application forms online has reduced the call for printed publications (see section Website). By far the most widely distributed publication is the brochure What Does the Guardianship Tribunal Do? (16,927 printed copies distributed in 2003/2004). Other high-volume publications and the comparative number downloaded from the Tribunal's website are provided in the table below.
Most popular publications distributed and downloads from website
What Does the Guardianship Tribunal Do
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 17,319
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 16,927
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - 731
Planning Ahead...Enduring Guardianship
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 13,394
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 8,794
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - 1,185
3 Separate Organisations
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 8,466
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 8,225
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - 54
Person Responsible
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 9,094
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 8,139
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - 568
Medical & Professional Assessment Reports
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 9,240
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 8,405
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - n/a
Enduring Power of Attorney
No. distributed in 2002/03 - 8,229
No. distributed in 2003/04 - 7,389
Website downloads Feb-June 04 - 1,680
Brochures
3 Separate Organisations (the roles of the Guardianship Tribunal, the Office of the Public Guardian and the Office of the Protective Commissioner)
What Does the Guardianship Tribunal Do?
We Welcome Your Feedback
Planning Ahead... Enduring Guardianship (includes form)
Getting Ready for Your Hearing
Planning Ahead... Enduring Power of Attorney (includes form)
Substitute Consent
Booklets
Behaviour Management and Guardianship
Information sheets
What does the Guardianship Tribunal do? (available in Arabic, Chinese, Croatian, English, Greek, Italian, Macedonian, Polish, Serbian, Spanish, Tagalog, Turkish, Vietnamese)
Person Responsible
Special Medical Treatment: Guidelines (plus information sheets about specific kinds of special medical treatments)
Access to New Treatments through Clinical Trials
Application for Approval of a Clinical Trial
Medical and Other Professional Assessment Reports
Guardianship Orders - What Happens after the Hearing?
Financial Management Orders - What Happens after the Hearing?
How to Revoke Your Guardianship Order
Information sheets for people who are parties to hearings
Guardianship Hearings
Financial Management Hearings
Guardianship and Financial Management Hearings
Representation at Hearings
Preliminary Hearings
Separate Representation
Hearings to Review/Revoke Financial Management Orders
Hearings for Review of Guardianship Orders
Application forms
Application for Guardianship and/or Financial Management
Application for Consent to Medical or Dental Treatment
Application to be Joined as a Party to a Matter
Application for Recognition of Appointment
Application to Review a Financial Management Order
Application to Revoke a Financial Management Order
Application to Revoke Enduring Guardianship
Application to Review Enduring Guardianship
Application to Review Enduring Power of Attorney
Other publications
Annual Report 2002/2003
Nick O'Neill, President
Marion Brown, Deputy President
On 12 February 2004, the Minister for Community Services, Ageing, Disability and Youth, the Honourable Carmel Tebbutt, launched the Tribunal's new website. After almost nine months in development, the new website was uploaded on 30 January 2004. The website will be a benchmark in accessible website design for other government agencies. The new website:
No. of visits
Feb 04 - 5,654
Mar 04 - 6,111
Apr 04 - 4,752
May 04 - 5,150
Jun 04 - 5,931
Total - 27,598
5 most popular pages (excl. home page)
Common questions
Feb 04 - 455
Mar 04 - 543
Apr 04 - 385
May 04 - 478
Jun 04 - 676
Total - 2,537
About the Tribunal
Feb 04 - 467
Mar 04 - 598
Apr 04 - 409
May 04 - 465
Jun 04 - 517
Total - 2,456
Enduring power of attorney
Feb 04 - 461
Mar 04 - 542
Apr 04 - 484
May 04 - 540
Jun 04 - 549
Total - 2,576
Applications
Feb 04 - 637
Mar 04 - 699
Apr 04 - 516
May 04 - 542
Jun 04 - 541
Total - 2,935
Publications & seminars
Feb 04 - 668
Mar 04 - 546
Apr 04 - 368
May 04 - 480
Jun 04 - 453
Total - 2,515
5 most popular publications
Appointment form enduring power attorney
Feb 04 - 217
Mar 04 - 311
Apr 04 - 255
May 04 - 260
Jun 04 - 288
Total - 1,331
Enduring power attorney brochure
Feb 04 - 349
Mar 04 - 404
Apr 04 - 330
May 04 - 308
Jun 04 - 289
Total - 1,680
Enduring guardianship brochure
Feb 04 - 220
Mar 04 - 220
Apr 04 - 204
May 04 - 294
Jun 04 - 247
Total - 1,185
Application guardianship/financial management
Feb 04 - 66
Mar 04 - 113
Apr 04 - 142
May 04 - 238
Jun 04 - 247
Total - 766
Appointment form enduring guardianship
Feb 04 - 173
Mar 04 - 211
Apr 04 - 209
May 04 - 259
Jun 04 - 298
Total - 1,150
Online applications received
Feb 04 - 30
Mar 04 - 35
Apr 04 - 22
May 04 - 21
Jun 04 - 22
Total - 130
Since its production in February 2003, the Tribunal's newest video, In Their Best Interests, has won three international film and video awards:
Extracts from the video can also be seen on the Tribunal's website.
President - Nick O'Neill
Deputy President - Marion Brown
Executive Officer/Registrar - Trevor Fairbairn
Executive Secretary - Jennifer Reynolds
Personal Assistant - Lisa Whittaker
Legal Officer - Esther Cho
Manager - Ryan Williams
Team Leaders
- Theresia Khoudair (part-time)/Amanda Legge (part-time)
- Margaret Watson (part-time)/Geraldine Northcott (part-time)
- Sue Young
Senior Investigation Officers
- David Evans, Loretta Rosicky, Peter Heffernan, Geraldine Northcott (part-time), Lee Dargan, Frances Massy-Westropp, Katrina Morris, Paula Norris* (part-time), Louise Smith, Amanda Legge (part-time), Jane Samek, Melissa Simcoe (part-time)
Investigation Officers
- Mary Chapman*, Trudi Cusack (part-time), Andrew Gabriel*, Frank Maguire* (part-time), Christopher Moore, Paula Norris* (part-time), Philippa Scott, Kathryn Tidd, Liesje Tromp*
Assistant Investigation Officers
- Maxine Spencer, Lois Warnock, Zebun Haji
Manager Client Information and Hearing Services - Janette Ogilvie
Assistant Manager - Lesley McGowan
Senior Hearing Officers
- Kerrie Menken, Cynthia Nejal*, Gary MacDonald (part-time)/Rada Stevanovic* (part-time)
Hearing Officers
- Lisa Spence* (part-time), Janet Stringer*
Assistant Hearing Officers
- Mariella Eberl (part-time), Elizabeth Evans*, Doreen Gray , Elizabeth Kim*, Christopher Mitchell, Sita Singh, Lisa Spence* (part-time), Eleanor Torry
Manager Client Information and Hearing Services - Janette Ogilvie
Assistant Manager - Sonia Bernardi* (part-time)
Publications Officer - Anita Ray (part-time)
Senior Information Officers
- Robyn Barlow, Diane Brehaut (part-time)
Information Officers
- Jihan Noun*, Andrew Gabriel*
Assistant Information Officers
- Sonia Tomasetig (part-time), Cristyn Davies (part-time), Angela Ogden (part-time), Craig Oliver*, Tina Pasa* (part-time)/Sally Shaw* (part-time) , Diane Cracknell* (part-time)
Manager - Linda Sengstock
Training and Development Officer - Gail Yueh (part-time)
Business Services Coordinator - Maria Sardisco
IT Systems Management Officer - Dennis Maby
CMS Systems Management Officer - Patrick Gooley
Business Services Officer - Christine Small
Assistant Business Services Officer - Sin-Lee Yeoh
Assistant Systems Officer - Christine Triantafillopoulos
Frank Barbara*
Tony Bolan*
Caroline Brehaut*
Natalie Clough (maternity leave)
Tia Covi (on extended leave)
Donna Crotty*
Luke Duncan*
Oscar Garrido*
Pam Giurissevich*
Tania Hibbert
Suin Jung*
Robyn O'Connor*
Ruth Pearson
Leanne Robinson
Michelle Savage (on extended leave)
Matthew Sexton
Patrika Sheehan*
Susan Wright
* Temporary or acting
Having a well trained, well informed workforce ensures the Tribunal is able to provide an efficient service for its clients. To achieve this goal, the Tribunal's administrative staff attended a variety of training programs, conducted either within the Tribunal or at external training organisations. These programs provided staff with skills, knowledge and information on using computers, occupational health and safety issues, human resource matters and many other aspects of the Tribunal's work.
The Tribunal's clients and issues relating to them have been the focus of much of the training undertaken over the past year. External programs attended include law and mental health, ageing in a multicultural society, vexatious litigants and understanding schizophrenia. An internally developed customer-service training program was conducted for staff by the Tribunal's Training and Development Officer.
Conscious of ensuring the safety of both staff and clients, the Tribunal arranges for staff to attend regular training in practical fire-fighting techniques. This training is conducted at the Tribunal by Comsafe, the training arm of the NSW Fire Brigade. Other safety concerns were addressed by external training programs in occupational health and safety consultation and risk management.
Staff attended a range of computer training programs. Programs conducted internally covered computer file management, using Microsoft Outlook, and basic word processing skills. External courses attended by staff included:
Computing skills
Occupational health and safety
Human resources
Other training
Tribunal members have a separate training program that provides information about conditions, medications and other matters relating to clients. Legislative changes and procedural matters are also discussed.
The training is conducted in the form of seminars, with a mix of presentation and discussion. There are four seminars per year for presiding members and a further three half-day and one full-day seminars for all Tribunal members. Topics covered in the last year included:
Nick O'Neill is a human rights lawyer in Australia and the Pacific and has taught, consulted and written on human rights in that region. He is co-author of Retreat from Injustice: Human Rights in Australian Law. He also has a strong administrative and constitutional law background. He is a former academic and practising lawyer in NSW, Victoria and Papua New Guinea, and official visitor to Rozelle Hospital.
In Papua New Guinea, he was a trial and appeals lawyer before being appointed Counsel Assisting the Commission of Inquiry into Land Matters. He established the Papua New Guinea Law Reform Commission and was its first secretary. He later played a significant role in the development of the Faculty of Law, University of Technology, Sydney.
Since joining the Tribunal, Nick has contributed chapters on the jurisdiction, practice and procedures of the Tribunal to various publications, including The Law Handbook, Lawyers Practice Manual, and Older Residents' Rights. He has also given numerous presentations on all aspects of the Tribunal's work and associated issues, including medico-legal issues to a wide range of audiences.
He has acted as an advisor, consultant and trainer to guardianship organisations both in Australia and overseas.
Marion joined the Tribunal as Deputy President in May 1995. She was formerly the principal solicitor at the Women's Legal Resources Centre-a community legal centre-and practised mainly in the fields of family law and violence against women and children. She served as a community representative on the NSW Child Protection Council and the NSW Sexual Assault Committee. She was also a commissioner on the NSW Legal Aid Commission and a part-time hearing commissioner with the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.
Marion has conducted many community legal education presentations, including the Women Out West project in which a multi-disciplinary team worked with Aboriginal women in western NSW to help women in various communities explore options to protect themselves and their children.
Currently, she is a member of a number of committees including the Specialist Advisory Committee for the Centre for Gender Related Violence Studies at University of NSW, Client Capacity sub-committee of Law Society Ethics Committee at the NSW Law Society. She was a representative on the Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care Steering Committee for Planning Ahead Project and Dementia Awareness for Lawyers Forum.
Marion has contributed to several publications, including The Law Handbook and Law and Relationships: A Woman's A-Z Guide.
Angela Beckett
Admitted as solicitor, also clinical psychologist. Experience in private legal practice and in community legal center. Member, Social Security Appeals Tribunal, Mental Health Review Tribunal and Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal. Experience in alternative dispute resolution and service provision to persons with a disability. Formerly professional member of the Guardianship Tribunal.
John Boersig
Solicitor. Present position is Director, University of Newcastle Legal Centre. Also coordinates a coalition of Aboriginal legal services to produce policy and research. Experience in criminal and personal injury law, victims' compensation and public interest advocacy.
Sally Ann Chopping
Lawyer and former Chairperson of the Residential, Fair Trading, and the Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunals. Experience in alternative dispute resolution.
John Cipolla
Solicitor. Experience representing clients with psychiatric and other disabilities both through Legal Aid and Mental Health Advocacy Service. Previously Principal Solicitor, Inner City Community Legal Centre. Experience in refugee law and as senior conciliator, Disability Discrimination Unit of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission. Part-time member of Consumer Trader Tenancy Tribunal and Migration Review Tribunal.
Jennifer Conley
Lawyer with experience in administrative law. Currently a member of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and the Administrative Decisions Tribunal.
Anthony Giurissevich
Solicitor in private practice. Former legal member, Veterans' Review Board and Social Security Appeals Tribunal. Experience in general litigation and advocacy for people with brain injury and mental illness.
Robin Gurr
Former barrister and Registrar in the Family Court of Australia. Former President of the NSW Community Services Appeals Tribunal and Senior member of the Fair Trading Tribunal. Currently workers' compensation arbitrator and presiding member on GREAT. Experience in alternative dispute resolution.
Christine Hayward*
Lawyer and former member of the Refugee Review Tribunal and Senior Deputy District Registrar in Commonwealth Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
John Hislop
Solicitor, now retired after more than 40 years in private legal practice. Former partner with firm with emphasis on business law, property, estates and litigation. Ten years (part-time) teacher with Faculty of Law, University of Sydney.
Geoffrey Hopkins
Solicitor since 1979. Private practice and legal aid work. Experience in advocacy across range of courts and tribunals. Emphasis on criminal and civil law, especially housing law and consumer remedies and legal issues relating to people with disabilities and the aged. Involvement with community groups. Mediator with community justice centres, Supreme Court and Law Society panels. Chairperson with Government and Related Employees Appeal Tribunal.
Carolyn Huntsman
Lawyer and current member of the Mental Health Review Tribunal and the Social Security Appeals Tribunal. Experience in working for Legal Aid and Aboriginal organisations.
Tony Krouk
Accredited family law specialist. Experience representing people with brain injury, mental illness and dementia, as both a private and community lawyer.
Julie Lulham
Solicitor and social worker. Experience in private practice and community legal centres. Experience in head injury rehabilitation and geriatric medicine.
Carol McCaskie, AM
Barrister. Member, Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and Mental Health Review Tribunal. Arbitrator, Workers Compensation Commission. Former general manager, Langton Centre. Qualifications in management, dispute resolution, geriatric nursing, nurse education and nursing administration.
Monica MacRae
Solicitor. Experience in private practice, particularly family law and general litigation. Member, Social Security Appeals Tribunal. Member, Mental Health Review Tribunal.
Hon. Josephine Maxwell
Former judge of the Family Court. Previously worked as a presiding member of the Guardianship Tribunal.
Peter Molony
Barrister with extensive experience as a tribunal member, including the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, Small Claims and Residential Tenancies Tribunal and Refugee Review Tribunal. Judicial member of Administrative Decisions Tribunal.
Linda Pearson
Teaches administrative law at University of NSW. Current member of the Migration Review Tribunal and the Social Security Appeals Tribunal.
Loretta Re
Barrister. Member, Mental Health Review Tribunal. Revised the law of evidence and formulated proposals for a Guardianship Tribunal (ACT) at the Australian Law Reform Commission.
Kim Ross
Solicitor and consultant in human rights and mental health law. Extensive tribunal experience and current member of Consumer, Trader and Tenancy Tribunal, and Mental Health Review Tribunal.
Anita Sekar
Solicitor. Worked with the Equity Division of the NSW Supreme Court, Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, and Australian Broadcasting Authority. Worked in community legal centres, Disability Discrimination Legal Centre and Intellectual Disability Rights Service. Experience as a conciliator with NSW Anti Discrimination Board.
Bernie Shipp
Solicitor. Experience with Legal Aid and Community Legal Centres. Now a member of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal and Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal.
James Simpson
Solicitor, mediator and policy consultant. Former deputy president, Community Services Appeals Tribunal. Former coordinator, Intellectual Disability Rights Service. Presiding member, Mental Health Review Tribunal. Justice Medal 2001- Law and Justice Foundation NSW.
Bill Tearle
Lawyer and financial counselor. Current member of the Consumer Trader and Tenancy Tribunal and the Mental Health Review Tribunal.
Ivan Beale
Psychologist, specialising in assessment and intervention for developmental and behavioural problems, as well as treatment adherence in people with chronic illness. Formerly Associate Professor and Director at the Learning Assessment Centre (University of Auckland).
Hayley Bennett
Clinical neuropsychologist in private and public practice, specialising in the assessment of mental capacity.
Isla Bowen
Pyschologist with extensive experience in development and implementation of behaviour intervention and support programs for people with intellectual disabilities. Lectures in developmental disability at Wollongong University.
Mary Ellen Burke
Clinical psychologist and consultant. Experience providing services to people with an intellectual disability who have challenging behaviour and their families/carers. Experience monitoring, developing services and service systems.
Barbara Burkitt
Psychiatrist. Experience in psychogeriatrics, formerly psychogeriatrician, Central Sydney Area Health Service.
Rhonda Buskell
Qualifications in psychiatry and in rehabilitation medicine. Formerly Director, Lidcombe Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit. Currently, consultant psychiatrist in private practice as consultation-liaison psychiatrist in public hospital system. Member, Mental Health Review Tribunal.
Sarah Carlill
Registered nurse, 20 years working in mental health with experience in acute care, inpatient and community care. Currently clinical nurse specialist for Northern Beaches Mental Health Service.
Sandra Dingle
Psychologist. Experience assessing and assisting people with dementia, stroke and brain injury. Founding coordinator of Home Respite Service, Wollongong.
Imelda Dodds
Social worker. Consultant with extensive experience in practice and administration in the fields of disability and guardianship. Former Public Guardian of Western Australia. President International Federation of Social Workers.
June Donsworth
Civil and forensic psychiatrist. Member of Mental Health Review Tribunal, member of Social Security Appeals Tribunal, psychiatrist at healthQuest, member of Impaired Registrants Panel of NSW Medical Board. Former psychiatrist on South Australian Parole Board and past member of South Australian Guardianship Board.
Sharon Flanagan
Clinical neuropsychologist with extensive experience of people who have suffered traumatic brain injury. Experience in adult rehabilitation in hospital and community settings and assessment of people with dementia and other acquired brain impairments.
Michael Frost
Former medical superintendent and chief executive officer, Marsden. Former chief executive officer, Western Sydney Developmental Disability Service.
Julie Garrard
Manager of social work and bereavement teams at Calvary Health Care Kogarah, providing palliative care and aged care services. Also, experience working with people with intellectual disabilities, brain injuries and HIV/AIDS, and in health complaints.
Jean Hollis
Old age psychiatrist. Previously staff specialist (part-time) with Aged and Community Care Services Team at Concord Repatriation General Hospital.
Susan Kurrle
Geriatrician. Member of Aged Care Assessment Team. Experience assessing and managing abuse of older people, and dementia.
Pamela Lockhart**
Registered nurse. Experience assessing and providing services for people with dementia.
Brenda McPhee
Medical practitioner. Experience in women's health, aged care, and counselling. Member, Social Security Appeals Tribunal. Medical officer, Bankstown Women's Health Centre.
Meredith Martin
Special educator. Expertise in behaviour management and positive programming for people with a disability, particularly intellectual disabilities.
Helen Molony
Psychiatrist with extensive experience with people with intellectual disabilities and challenging behaviours.
Helen Newman*
Clinical neuropsychologist in private practice. Experience assessing people who have suffered brain impairment.
Tony Ovadia
Psychologist with experience with people with mental illness. Previously managed the Boarding House Review Team.
Michael Pasfield*
Psychiatrist. Member NSW and NT Mental Health Review Tribunals. Former member Social Security Appeals Tribunal, Repatriation Review Tribunal and Veterans' Review Board. Consultant practice, psychiatric hospitals and government departments.
Carmelle Peisah
Consultant old age psychiatrist and research fellow at the Academic Department for Old Age Psychiatry, Prince of Wales Hospital and conjoint senior lecturer University of NSW. Expertise in family therapy. Experience in medicolegal cases of competency and testamentary capacity in older persons.
Suzanne Stone
General practitioner. Currently in private practice; including assessment and management of elderly patients with dementia, both in institutional settings and in their own homes. Published in the field of pre-senile dementia. Experience in the field of women's reproductive health and with patients with eating disorders in community settings.
Susan Taylor
Social worker. Experience in community mental health services and providing support services for people with multiple sclerosis. Member, Social Security Appeals Tribunal.
Velupillay Vignaendra
Neurologist with extensive experience of people who have strokes, acquired brain injury and other neurological impairments.
Carolyn West
Specialist in rehabilitation medicine. Head of Spina Bifida Unit, New Children's Hospital, Westmead. Visiting medical officer, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and Westmead Hospital for adult services for people with spina bifida.
Wai-Kwan (Tim) Wong
Psychologist with experience in positive programming for people with intellectual disabilities. Has also worked with people with intellectual disabilities in areas of sexuality and sexual behaviours. Currently working with people affected by HIV/AIDS and hepatitis C.
Janice Wortley
Psychologist with experience assessing people with psychiatric disabilities, acquired brain injury and intellectual disabilities. Experience in behaviour intervention and support. Family experience of disability.
Robert (TH) Yeoh
General practitioner since 1975. Currently president Alzheimer's Association of Australia. Member of the medication advisory committees of several aged care homes. Official visitor under the Mental Health Act 1990. Member of Ministerial Advisory Committee on Ageing NSW. Representing ADGP on National Aged Care Alliance.
Stanley Alchin, OAM
Retired director of nursing, Rozelle Hospital. Registered psychiatric nurse. Former President, After Care Association of NSW. Member, Mental Health Review Tribunal. Vice President, Sydney Male Choir.
Rhonda Ansiewicz
Lecturer in social work and community work, advocacy and human rights. Coordinator Aboriginal Rural Education Program in Community Welfare, University of Western Sydney. In private practice, works with people with a mental illness. Family experience with schizophrenia. Activist for social change.
Andrew Barczynski
Social worker. Manager of Emergency Relief Program in NSW for Commonwealth Department of Family and Community Services. Previously worked for 14 years in Disability Services Program. President of non-government organisation providing services for older people from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
Elaine Becker
Social worker. Experience working with people with dementia and their carers. Worked with the Office of the Public Guardian. Family experience as private guardian.
Mary Butcher
Nurse with extensive aged care experience in residential and community settings. Previously coordinated community care packages to support elderly people at home. Family experience of providing care to a person with dementia.
Maria Circu