Learning Exchange 2 Outcomes

Moving Forward

• We will maintain the model of this Learning Exchange, beginning with a focused presentation on a particular theme and/or country context and then zooming out to a broader plenary discussion.
  • The next call – on April 25 at 6:30am ET – will start with a discussion of reforms and subsequent challenges in Colombia and Peru
• Our conversation was rich, and felt like it could have gone on much longer. In particular, you seemed keen to further discuss the topic of insurance and liability for volunteer supporters.
  • If there is enough uptake, we’d be happy to offer an additional call for those interested in this subject – please let me know (chantal@chantalpasquarello.com) by Tuesday, April 5 if you would like to participate and what days and times are best during the weeks of April 11 and 18.
  • We will also experiment with adding 30 minutes to the end of the April 25 call as opt-in “free discussion” time.
    • If you have a specific agenda item you’d like to suggest for this time, please let me know. Otherwise, it will serve as an optional space for continued collaboration. Please look out for a separate calendar invitation.
• As there were no objections prior to or during the call, we will be recording these Exchanges for those unable to make it in real time. You can find the recording for most of the March call here. Unfortunately, neither the recording nor the closed captions pick up the English translation for Ornit’s bit, but we hope you’ll find the rest of the call useful!

Key Takeaways from the Conversation

Implementation efforts in Israel & open discussion of main obstacles to implementation

• Presentation by Ornit Dan, Director of Supported Decision-Making program for Government of Israel, Ministry of Justice:
  • Power Point slides: Supported Decision Making in Israel: From Theory to Practice (alternative link)
• Presentation by Dr. Meytal Segal-Reich, National Supervisor, Older Person's Representation and legal capacity affairs, Legal Aid, Ministry of Justice, Israel
  • Power Point slides: Supported Decision Making Through Special Representation (alternative link)
• Summary of questions and discussion
  • Lawyers do mediation and representation, following every legal civil procedure. Lawyers do representation and a lot of work with the people while representing them, including working with the person’s family/friends/caretakers. It can be a challenge to learn about a person’s will.
  • Lawyers are trained in how to communicate with persons with disabilities. This includes working with people with cognitive disabilities. Lawyers communicate and cooperate with support workers and other specialists, together, joining forces with specialized knowledge to communicate.
  • There is also a kit for lawyers on communication, proper words, how to share a message in a simple and plain way. There are kits adapted for these lawyers specifically – note, Meytal will share this lawyer-client communication toolkit after the translation is completed.
  • Volunteer SDM supports and professional indemnity insurance: In Ireland, the experience is that a volunteer is responsible for their own insurance, thus limiting the pool of volunteers. In Israel, special insurance is procured for volunteers which includes a provision that a volunteer may support no more than two people.
  • Lawyers learn about things what they cannot do – assume what a SDM person wants, a lawyer can’t decide for themselves. More knowledge should be obtained about the SDM person, their will and preferences. The main thing is communication, and what’s what matters the most – practice and believe in, a method of life, something that they learn every day.
  • There has been a significant legal shift over the last 10 years, but the elements of guardianship still slip into the SDM paradigm. 
  • People can have more than one supporter – if they want to have their family members as supporters for most of their time, but also prefer to have a volunteer/professional for a particular situation. 

Collaboration methods

• We want to “meet you where you’re at,” so we organized the Jamboard from today’s call into this ranking of resources you’re currently using, or have found most useful in similar collaborative spaces.
  • This will inform IDRC’s thinking on tools and resources we can use to help you collaborate more fluidly on A12 efforts. We’ll keep you updated as this evolves!

Upcoming topics

• We organized the Jamboard from February’s call into buckets, which you can find in this document. Broadly, these are:
  • Community involvement and engagement;
  • Legal and administrative difficulties;
  • Ensuing a person-centered approach during the decision-making process;
  • Ensuring a human rights lens;
  • Overcoming resistance to change
• In addition to these themes, you asked for conversations around:
  • strategies for addressing opposition of the judiciary
  • civil society coalition-building or maintenance after law reform has been achieved - and knowing when/if to compromise when we have the outcome of the law reform, and when/what to keep challenging
• All of the above will inform our thinking about themes moving forward

Attendees

1. Andrea Parra: Consultant, lawyer, human rights activist, formerly Director of PAIIS, legal aid clinic on disability rights, Universidad de Los Andes, Colombia
2. Bob Fleischner: Formerly with Centre for Public Representation, US
3. Camille Latimier: Executive Director, Inclusion Czech Republic, Czech Republic
4. Cathy Costanza: Director, Centre for Public Representation, US
5. Chine Chan Yan: Director, Inclusive Asia Hong Kong, China
6. Eilionoir Flynn: Director, Centre for Disability Law and Policy, National University of Ireland, Ireland
7. Emily W. Fung: Advisor, Inclusive Asia and 'Chosen Power' (self-advocacy network in Hong Kong), Hong Kong, China
8. Georgiana Pascu: Program Manager, Centre for Legal Resources, Romania
9. Joan Cornachio: Coordinator, Supported Decision Making New York, U.S.
10. Kristin Booth Glen: Professor Emerita, CUNY Law, New York, and Judge (retired) of the Manhattan Surrogate's Court, U.S.
11. Lana Kerzner: Barrister and solicitor, Disability Rights – Toronto, Canada
12. Lu Han: Open Society Foundations, U.S.
13. Manel Mhiri: Human Rights Officer, Inclusion International, UK
14. Michael Kendrick: Centre for Public Representation, and Consultant, US
15. Morgan Whitlatch: Director of SDM, Centre for Public Representation, and formerly Legal Director, Quality Trust, DC, US
16. Nadia Shabani: Director, Bulgaria Centre for Not for Profit Law (BCNL), Bulgaria
17. Oana Dodu: Center for Legal Resources, Romania
18. Ornit Dan: Director of Supported Decision-Making program for Government of Israel, Ministry of Justice, Israel
19. Dr. Meytal Segal-Reich: National Supervisor, Older Person's Representation and legal capacity affairs, Legal Aid, Ministry of Justice, Israel
20. Keren Barnea: Government of Israel, Ministry of Justice, Israel
21. Tirza Leibowitz: Open Society Foundations, U.S.    
22. Wayne Martin: Prof of Philosophy, University of Essex, Director, Essex Autonomy Project, UK
23. Elizabeth Kamundia: Assistant Director, Kenya National Commission on Human Rights at Kenya National Commission on Human Rights
24. Rebekah Diller: Clinical Professor of Law, Co-Director, Cardozo Bet Tzedek Legal Services
25. Yotam Tolub: formerly with Bizchut, Consultant, Disability rights

Project Team

1. Michael Bach: IRIS
2. Chantal Pasquarello: Project Coordinator
3. Jonathan Hung: IDRC   
4. Michelle D'Souza: IDRC
5. Stéphanie Guico: consultant
6. Pavel Chernousov: IRIS
7. Samuel Ragot: IRIS
8. Shira Marom: Interpreter