Fighting for a voice

Employment and Income Assistance (E.I.A.) refused to fund my voice synthesizer saying it is not a necessity; it would be nice for me to have, but not an essential need which they would pay for. I could not believe they could say that to communicate freely is not an essential need. I wrote a letter, and I appealed the decision. I had to go in front of a panel of three people to state my case. In the meantime, my E.I.A. worker refused to talk to me on the phone because she could not understand me. My worker told me they would buy TTY. In my written letter to appeal and in the hearing, I pointed out that, yes, a TTY would be great but I also needed a communication device for talking face-to-face, not only on the phone.

At the hearing, the E.I.A. representative had nothing to present. I was questioned as to why I did not go to charitable organizations for the funding. I pointed out that if I did not get a voice synthesizer, I would require a 24-hour assistant to interpret for me. This would cost them way more and take away my independence that I cherish. I also made it clear that to me a voice synthesizer is an essential device because I need it for my safety to get my point across. For example, when I am in a wheelchair taxi and the driver does not tie me in safely and cannot or will not take the time to understand me. The appeal came back ruling that in my case, I was right, I did need a voice synthesizer. It was a necessity not only for my quality of life but also for my safety. I was so happy to know I deserve to be able to communicate without having somebody glued to me. I have a voice!