Page 3486 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 15 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
There are some things that will become more obvious over time and with more detailed research into hearing impairment. The NHMRC noted that it found good evidence to recommend against distraction testing for infants.
While the ACT program has only been operating for the last four years, there are many positive outcomes to report. The ACT newborn hearing screening program has been successful in identifying infants with hearing impairment early. Babies identified as having a hearing impairment are being treated or remediated earlier than prior to the establishment of the program.
The ACT compliance with newborn hearing screening for the period 2005-06 is estimated at 98.6 per cent. It benchmarks well with other jurisdictions. Over the first three years of the program, approximately 31 babies were referred for diagnostic evaluation following newborn hearing screening during this time.
It is too early to make any claims about the long-term impact of the program, as the initial cohort of children tested is only around four years of age. The real test will come over the next two or three decades. Only then will we be able to determine whether the testing and early intervention has made a difference to the educational, social and financial outcomes of those children with hearing impairment.
Catching hearing loss early and putting in place measures to ensure early intervention and support must provide better outcomes for those children affected than doing nothing. I would like to commend the efforts of the ACT government in expanding the newborn hearing screening program in 2005-06 to cover all babies born in the ACT and not just those born in public hospitals.
Finally, all children should have the opportunity to communicate. A hearing loss that is undetected for even the first six months of a child’s life can critically compromise their speech, language, cognitive and social skills, compared to other children identified earlier. I would like to commend the government for the extension of the program to cover all children born in the ACT.
MR SMYTH (Brindabella) (10.44): The opposition will be agreeing to the motion moved by Mr Gentleman today. We thank him for raising an important issue. It is interesting as a new parent—and I went through this seven months ago—when they take your baby down to the lab, in this case at Calvary Hospital, and the technician does the testing.
What a relief it is to find out that your newborn has hearing, because until that time you just do not know. I see a few heads nodding around the chamber of those who have also been through the procedure recently. Little David Arthur came through with flying colours. It was a great relief. I do not think any of us could know what it must be like for a new mother or new father to be told that their child has a problem.
It is interesting that not a lot of work has been done on the effects of deafness. In February this year Vicdeaf, which is the Victorian Deaf Society, and the CRC here commissioned Access Economics to do some work to find out how many people are genuinely affected, what the effect is and what the cost of that effect is, not only in
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .