Waygood and Secretary Department of Families and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs

[2006] AATA 1020

Administrative

Appeals

Tribunal

 

DECISION AND REASONS FOR DECISION [2006] AATA 1020

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL      )

)          No N2006/787

GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE  DIVISION		)
Re		DEBORAH WAYGOOD

Applicant

And SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF FAMILIES & COMMUNITY SERVICES & INDIGENOUS AFFAIRS

Respondent

DECISION

Tribunal Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member

Date20 November 2006

PlaceSydney

Decision For the reasons given orally at the conclusion of the hearing, the Tribunal affirms the decision under review.
The oral reasons for decision have been transcribed by Auscript and are furnished to the Applicant and to the Respondent as it is the reasons for the Tribunal's decision.

.................(sgd).............................

Ms G Ettinger   Senior Member

CATCHWORDS

SOCIAL SECURITY - disability support pension - carer allowance - simultaneous receipt of both benefits - s 954 of the Social Security Act 1991 - decision under review affirmed.

Social Security Act 1991 – sections 954(1) and (2)

REASONS FOR DECISION

20 November 2006 Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member     

BACKGROUND 

1.      This is a decision in the appeal of Mrs Deborah Waygood to the Department of Family and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs.

2.      Mrs Waygood and her husband both have disabilities and are receiving disability support pension.  Mr Waygood also receives carer allowance to care for his wife.  Mrs Waygood has appealed the decisions of the Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services and Indigenous Affairs and the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, which found that she cannot also be paid carer allowance. 

3. Mrs Waygood knows that the requirements governing carer allowance are made pursuant to section 954 of the Social Security Act 1991. She told me that she also knows that whilst qualified to receive carer allowance, she cannot be paid carer allowance. I appreciated the candour with which she gave her evidence. I noted that the situation arises because section 954(2) of the Social Security Act 1991 states that if a person is qualified for carer allowance for a disabled adult the disabled adult is not able to qualify for carer allowance for another disabled adult. 

4.      Mrs Waygood told me that she is appealing the decision as far as she can go, which includes her appeal to this Tribunal, because she has approached and further intends to approach her local Member of Parliament in an effort to have the legislation amended.  She said that it is not only the payment in which people with similar disabilities would be interested, but the other services which are available once one receives carer allowance, particularly for people such as the Waygoods who live in an isolated area where psychiatric services are very limited.

ISSUE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL

5.      Now, the only matter before me is whether Mrs Waygood can be paid carers allowance in consideration of her husband’s illness, and the need for such care.

EVIDENCE AND CONCLUSIONS

6.      Mrs Waygood’s evidence, which I accept, and with which the respondent has no argument, is that she suffers pain from a back injury which she incurred some 18 or 19 years ago, and that her husband has suffered bipolar disorder for the past 26 years, and also suffers post-traumatic stress syndrome.  Mrs Waygood told me that he has received disability support pension since approximately December 2005, and that he receives carer pension to look after her.  She said that he does some lifting and cleaning to assist her.  Mrs Waygood said, however, that her husband’s condition is unstable, his medication is under review, and that when he is in a depressive phase she has to assist him with getting out of bed, showering him, and assisting him with eating.

7.      She said that at times her husband is aggressive and she has felt like leaving him, but she would not do that because she has been married to him for 30 years and loves him.  She says he could not cope without her, adding that things are very difficult because of the nature of psychiatric illness, which is a special thing. Mrs Waygood told me that services available are very limited, especially in isolated areas such as where they live. 

8.      I noted the details of Mr Waygood’s violent behaviour in the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal, but did not ask Mrs Waygood to elaborate on it before me because I did not need to in order to consider the issue before me.

9. In coming to a decision I have accepted the evidence, and I have reviewed section 954 of the Social Security Act 1991, and find that Mrs Waygood would be qualified under section 954(1) to receive carer pension. However, it is not payable to her because pursuant to section 954(2) of the Act, if a person is qualified for a carer allowance for a disabled adult the disabled adult is not able to qualify for carer allowance for another disabled adult, that is, Mrs Waygood cannot be paid carer allowance to care for her husband because he already receives carer allowance to care for her. Accordingly, the decision of the Social Security Appeals Tribunal must be affirmed.

DECISION

10.     The decision under review is affirmed.

I certify that the 10 preceding paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for the decision herein of Ms G Ettinger, Senior Member

Signed:         .....................................................................................
  Associate

Date/s of Hearing  20 November 2006
Date of Decision  20 November 2006
Representative for the Applicant               unrepresented
Representative for the Respondent          Mr George Lozynsky