Panel data provided by Madison's Canadian Lumber Reporter.

Shea's Story Part 2 -Raising Children You Can’t See

By Peter Ewart

By Peter Ewart


In the first installment of “Shea’s Story”, we discussed the case of Shea Anker, a bright and determined resident of Prince George who is raising two young boys on her own. Shea, who is blind and relies on our social services system to assist her raising her children, was cut off a provincially-funded home support stipend last May, and since then has experienced seemingly unnecessary and extremely difficult challenges coping with her situation. The tasks that the home support worker assisted with – getting groceries, making some meals, as well as lending a hand with the children – have now fallen completely to Shea.

Anyone who has raised young children knows that at the best of times it is a challenge. Kids are naturally rambunctious and often have temper tantrums or other behavioural problems. Just about every parent at one time or another has faced the difficulty of a child being stubborn and not wanting to go to bed or take a bath. Eventually, the child loses and takes the bath or is bundled away to bed. But for Shea such a routine little tantrum can be a major ordeal, because the child knows that Shea cannot see and, thus, can easily stay just out of reach or even hide in a closet or under a bed. As a result, Shea faces the prospect of pursuing a screaming child through the different rooms of the house, something that can be hazardous for Shea as well as the child.

A similar problem exists in making sure the children pick up toys and other potentially hazardous objects from floors and staircases. A toy car on a stair could mean that Shea takes a bad fall. Food that has been thrown on the floor and gone rotten can be picked up by a toddler and eaten, causing him to get sick. Shea does her best to keep the house as clean as possible, but it is always a challenge with two young ones.

Understanding the importance of telling the truth is also of vital importance for the children. When a sighted person sees a child about to stick a fork into an electrical outlet or put a sharp object in his mouth, she can react quickly and avert a potential disaster. But Shea cannot see what her kids are doing and must rely on them telling her accurately and truthfully what they are doing at all times.

Shea, of course, is intelligent and perceptive, and uses her other senses to compensate for her lack of sight. For example, her father relates an incident when he and she were having a conversation in her house. Suddenly, out of the blue, she shouted to one of her sons to get off the kitchen table. Her father was dumbfounded as to how she knew where her son was. Shea offhandedly explained that she could tell by the relative location of his voice.

Shea also prides herself on the fact that, through touch, she is able to remember particular pieces of her kid’s clothing and thus make sure that these are not mismatched by colour or pattern, thus avoiding the critical comments of other parents or her kids being teased by playmates.

As they grow older, the children must develop a particular relationship with their mother whereby they do not take advantage of her blindness. While she fulfills the role of parent, they must learn to understand their mother’s situation and to help her in specific ways. This relationship is very important for the family unit to be strong; but Shea needs a little help from our social service system to ensure the children will grow up in a healthy and safe environment and become fully functioning, responsible adults.

Soon after arriving in Prince George, Shea used her provincially-funded monthly stipend to hire Sarah, a UNBC student, as a homecare worker. By all accounts, Sarah did a wonderful job, and, as Shea describes it, was an “immense help” both “physically and mentally”, taking some of the burden off of her by picking up groceries and helping make meals. Above all though, the area in which Sarah helped the most was with the kids. As a result of her regular presence (a few hours most days), the children’s behaviour and attitudes developed in a positive way, and the atmosphere in the house was continually improving.

But then, after a year of valued support and strengthening of family life, the homecare stipend was cut. Since then, Shea has been on her own raising the kids and, not surprisingly – with the sudden departure of Sarah, is experiencing some discipline and control problems with the children – problems that are causing Shea concern for their wellbeing. For example, because the homecare worker is no longer there to accompany them, Shea and her children leave the house less often. Indeed, Shea’s biggest fear when she goes out with her kids is not being robbed, nor is it slipping and falling, nor is it losing her way home. No. The thing that terrifies and haunts her the most is that one of the children will let go of her hand and run off into the vast expanse of darkness that surrounds her.

Because she has no one to help her on outings, Shea is spending more of her small disability pension on taxi cabs and handy-dart and she worries about the children who miss the routine of having the home support worker as part of their lives. Lack of help with cleaning, laundry and food preparation is also a big worry to the point where her father has scraped together a small amount of money each month to ensure that the townhouse receives a thorough cleaning once a week. And Sarah comes from time to time because she has grown fond of Shea and misses the children. But it’s not the same as knowing that you have support coming in for a couple of hours each day.

It’s surprising what a difference just a few hours of home care can make, whether it is for Shea, or an injured worker or an elderly person with mobility problems. Strangely enough, this small bit of support makes it possible for Shea to lead a relatively independent life. Yet, there is often a negative connotation when discussing citizens who receive disability benefits or other financial assistance from social service coffers. In fact, those living on “government” dollars are often described as living off or being dependent on “the system”.

It’s interesting to think about the concept of dependence and independence. Consider for a moment who is truly “independent”. Is there anyone in today’s society that could honestly warrant such a label? We rely on farmers for our food, on medical professionals for health care, on mechanics to repair our cars, on loggers to harvest timber, on carpenters to build our homes, on teachers to teach our children. The list is infinite. But even with this substantial level of “dependence”, most people would describe themselves as “independent”. Yet, when someone with a disability is in need of even limited financial support, as in Shea’s case, there is a stigma, a negative undertone suggesting she is not carrying her load – that society is doing her a favor by providing any support at all. Instead of viewing assistance as a means of strengthening Shea’s capacity to live independently and raise her family – something she should be entitled to, the very fact that she needs home care is often viewed as a weakness on her part.

This notion of independence becomes even more interesting when we consider the kinds of support that are provided to others with more power in and over our society. For example, when millions upon millions of tax dollars are used to provide infrastructure (roads, rail lines, etc.) for resource extraction industries – mining, logging or oil and gas exploration, are these companies viewed as “living off the system” or unable to function independently? On the contrary, there is a real sense of entitlement. There is an assumption that such infrastructure should be provided. Yet, when a single mother like Shea receives a small stipend to get help with household chores and raising her children, it tends to reflect negatively on her and her capacity to be a good mother and care for her family. An interesting double standard at best.

And while large resource extraction monopolies easily receive their “support” with the active assistance of government representatives, Shea is left on her own to battle through the endless maze of provincial government bureaucracy from which she seeks only a small amount of funding to allow periodic assistance in raising her family. She has learned the hard way that navigating a busy city street or the rooms of her new townhouse cannot compare at all to this tortuous, irrational and confusing obstacle course she has been forced to navigate.

In part 3 of this series, we will examine what difficulties Shea is having with this bureaucracy, and what paths she has tried to navigate through the chaos of its policies. And all because she seeks to use her skills and capacity to raise her family, with some supports to assist her – like any other citizen would expect to do

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home