Disability continues to be the leading reason for discrimination complaints received by the Australian Human Rights Commission. Disability comprised 37 per cent of these types of complaints in 2012–13. Most Disability Discrimination Act complaints in 2012–13 related to goods, services and facilities (34 per cent) or employment (33 per cent). Unlawful contravention of a disability standard was cited in 11 per cent of complaints. The major areas of complaints during the past five years are set out in Figure 1. Figure 1 Top-five areas of disability-related complaints, proportions received by area between 2008–09 and 2012–13 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Total Disability-related Complaints 980 1057 823 955 793 Top five areas of complaints received* 2035 2354 2176 1249 1084 Goods, Services and Facilities 35% 37% 35% 36% 34% Employment 40% 36% 31% 31% 33% Unlawful to Contravene Disability Standard 8% 9% 11% 12% 11% Access to Premises 2% 3% 6% 4% 6% Education 9% 9% 9% 8% 6% Notes: Each complaint can cover multiple areas, which is why there are more areas received than the number of complaints. In addition to the areas above, 1 per cent to 3 per cent of complaints related to Accommodation, Commonwealth Administration and Laws, Clubs and Incorporated Associations and Superannuation, between 2008-09 and 2012-13. There were none or less than 1 per cent of complaints relating to Land, Advertisements, Sport, Qualifying Bodies, and Registered Organisations in this period. Source: Australian Human Rights Commission Annual Report: 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13. Further data on these trend indicators, including available information by gender, Indigenous status and other factors, appear in Appendix 2. Stakeholder feedback Rights protection, justice and legislation were identified by stakeholders as needing a high priority for further investigation and investment by governments. While stakeholders acknowledged the Australian Human Rights Commission’s Equal Before the Law Report as a positive step forward, they also noted that the true value of the report would only become evident in the way governments respond to its insights and proposed actions.
2006 - People with a reported disability 2006 - People without disability 2010 - People with a reported disability 2010 - People without disability Better than Good 30.2% 67.8% 32.7% 74.0% Good 34.6% 27.7% 32.3% 22.8% Source: ABS unpublished, General Social Survey 2006, General Social Survey 2010. 6.2 Access to GPs, dental and other primary healthcare professional Proportions of people with disability who accessed selected health services in 2012, are presented in 5. Data from the patient experience survey shows the general population had lower or equal rates of visits to health professionals in comparison to people without disability. However, this comparison should be treated with caution because the two surveys were undertaken using different methods. 5 People with disability aged under 65 years who accessed health services in the last year, 2012 Health Service accessed % Health Service accessed % Saw a general practitioner 93% Saw a dental professional 49% Saw a medical specialist 55% Admitted to hospital 21% Visited hospital emergency department 27% Saw 3 or more health professionals for same condition 33% A health professional helped to coordinate care 23% - - Source: DSS analysis of ABS Survey of Disability, Ageing and Carers, 2012. 6.3 Risk factors for preventable disease in people with disability People with disability appear to have more health-risk factors than the general adult population. The Australian Health Survey 2011–12 revealed that people with profound and severe disability are more likely than the general population to: smoke on a daily basis (19 per cent compared to 16 per cent) have low exercise levels or be sedentary (87 per cent compared to 68 per cent) have a body mass index classified as overweight or obese (76 per cent compared to 63 per cent). However, people with disability were less likely to consume alcohol at risky levels, as set out by the National Health and Medical Research Council in 2009.