Uli Cartwright's Mission to Reform Guardianship Gag Laws

Share this @internewscast.com

When Uli Cartwright embarked on creating a documentary about his own life, he didn’t foresee that it would eventually bring him to the doors of Victoria’s parliament.

Living with a disability, Cartwright had been under state-managed administration. He viewed the documentary as an opportunity to reveal his broader journey and “dismantle misconceptions”.

“I aimed to challenge stereotypes and carve out my unique path,” he remarks.

“Realizing that a typical nine-to-five job wasn’t feasible for me due to health constraints, I decided to dedicate myself to advocacy, raising awareness about disability, chronic illness, and mental health.”

The documentary titled Life is a Battlefield is accessible online. However, it was temporarily removed over concerns it might have breached a confidentiality regulation impacting those involved in guardianship or administration processes in Victoria.

Cartwright, who has multiple disabilities, expresses that he perceives the world in a different way. Credit: Otis Filley

“I didn’t know what the legacy, or the message, of my movie was going to be,” he tells SBS News.

“But it turned out to be this law.”

Under administration

Living with several disabilities, Cartwright, 30, says he sees the world differently.

“I think my experiences can be insightful, and also allow me to be more empathetic … but obviously, there’s barriers to just existing because the world is very different for people with disability,” he says.

Cartwright was born with multiple chronic health conditions, including a lung condition, and spent the first three years of his life in hospital. He also lives with mental health issues and ADHD.

This forced him to grow up quickly.

“[Having] a social life and friends were difficult,” he says.

While I didn’t really have a childhood, I was forced into having to deal with life and navigate it at a young age.

Cartwright was in foster care until the age of 18 and later moved into a group home.

“I was a typical young person who didn’t really want to be controlled or listen to anybody, and I didn’t want to have responsibility. I was just exhausted from being an adult, really,” he says.

“I don’t think I had the right supports in place. So, people made assumptions of my capacity.”

While at the group home, a support worker applied to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) to put Cartwright on an administration order. This meant his finances were under the control of the State Trustees.

Cartwright understands this was due to “inappropriate” spending.

In Australia, a person may be placed under guardianship or administration orders if they require help with decision-making.

As specified in an order, an appointed guardian has legal authority to make decisions or support decision-making for someone over personal and lifestyle matters, while an administrator is granted authority for financial and property matters.

Advocates have reported an increase in applications for guardianship and financial administration since the introduction of the National Disability Insurance Scheme, according to a recent report from the Disability Advocacy Network Australia.

In several states, there are growing worries that guardianship might be increasingly utilized by service providers as a strategy to sidestep engaging with families advocating for an individual’s rights.

A man sits in front of a water fountain in a park.

Cartwright was subject to an administration order for three years. Credit: Otis Filley

In Cartwright’s experience, being under an administration order “strips you of your identity even more”.

After three years, his order was revoked.

Telling his story

SBS acquired and broadcast Life is a Battlefield in December 2021 to mark the International Day of People with Disability. Afterwards, it was available online via SBS’ streaming service On Demand.

Two weeks later, VCAT raised concerns regarding Cartwright’s identification as a person previously under the control of State Trustees, which is subject to restrictions by law. SBS made the decision to temporarily remove the program from On Demand to allow the tribunal’s concerns to be addressed.

Under clause 37 in schedule 1 of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998, a person must not publish or broadcast information that identifies parties involved in guardianship and administration proceedings.

In Cartwright’s case, this meant he could not legally identify himself.

SBS News is investigating experiences of guardianship in Australia. Have you got a story to share?
Get in touch at investigations@sbs.com.au or securely contact Emma Brancatisano at emmabrancatisano.journalist@protonmail.com.

The only exception to this law — which is commonly referred to as a ‘gag law’ — is if the tribunal makes an order stating that identification can proceed because it is considered to be in the public interest.

Cartwright applied to VCAT for a declaration that clause 37 did not apply in his case.

A tribunal deputy president made an order allowing Uli to be identified, meaning he could tell his story.

He is one of the very few Australians currently or formerly under guardianship or administration orders able to do so.

‘We need to start somewhere’

The publication of information about guardianship proceedings is prohibited in most Australian states and territories, excluding the ACT. The specific conditions under which publication may go ahead vary across jurisdictions.

While these rules are designed to protect vulnerable people, they essentially act as a ‘gag’, preventing those subject to them from talking publicly about their experiences. They also, by and large, stop the media from covering them.

Cartwright believes, in certain contexts, gag laws can lead to the public missing out on hearing important stories.

“You cannot protect or solve something unless you have experienced it yourself. If you haven’t, it’s crucial to listen to those who have,” he asserts.

“I would argue that it’s a form of institutionalisation. It’s kind of like setting us aside. We’re here, you want to protect us, but you don’t want to listen to us.”

The Disability Royal Commission acknowledged that confidentiality laws impact the rights of people with disability. It also recommended that states and territories look to “repeal provisions prohibiting publication of material identifying a party to the proceedings as the default position”.

Cartwright sees reforming gag laws as a first step towards navigating — and reforming — the “complicated” guardianship system as a whole.

If we don’t change this law, we can’t talk about it openly.

“We need to start somewhere.”

A fresh push in Victoria

On Wednesday, Greens MP Anasina Gray-Barberio introduced a proposed amendment to Victoria’s legislation regarding the gag law, while Cartwright watched on from the chamber.

“The bill basically states that this gag provision is not the default provision. I’m not interested in getting rid of it,” he says.

“I do believe that there needs to be some protections in place to stop abuse and weaponisation of people’s stories.”

Gray-Barberio told members of parliament the current restrictions set out in clause 37 are “outdated and fail to uphold fundamental human rights”.

“It strips away their [people with disability] dignity and autonomy, and leaves them silenced and disempowered.

“By silencing individuals, this provision grants guardians, administrators, and service providers immunity from examination — a glaring weakness in the current legal framework.”

Cartwright believes reforming gag laws is a first step to bring about change. Credit: Otis Filley

The push for reform in Victoria is backed by the Office of the Public Advocate — the state disability rights advocacy body — along with disability advocacy organisation VALID, and service providers Yooralla and Life Without Barriers.

Debate on the bill has been adjourned for two weeks.

A Victorian government spokesperson said in a statement the government acknowledges the rights of people with a disability to have a say in decision-making that directly impacts their lives.

“We have accepted in principle the Royal Commission’s recommendation to amend guardianship and administration laws by removing any ‘default’ confidentiality provisions,” the spokesperson said.

“We remain committed to collaborating with the Office of the Public Advocate and those with firsthand experience in disability and guardianship to ensure that Victoria’s legislation stays effective.”

Tasmania leading reforms

Elsewhere in Australia, reforms are slowly being considered.

Changes to Tasmania’s guardianship and administration gag law were introduced last year following a campaign by Advocacy Tasmania.

The non-profit rights advocacy organisation started a broader push to end what it termed “abhorrent” guardianship and administration practices in 2021, including gag laws.

“Tasmanians whose lives were being utterly destroyed by guardianship and administration were coming to us day in and day out, completely desperate for help,” chief executive Leanne Groombridge tells SBS News.

“As an organization that strives to uphold individuals’ rights daily, we found ourselves unable to shield them — it was a clash between David and Goliath, where Goliath always prevailed.”

We knew the whole guardianship system had to change, and we knew people’s stories were how you open the door to a possibility of change.

“But the very system that was enabling these abuses to happen was gagging people from speaking out about what was happening to them.”

A Department of Justice spokesperson confirmed in a statement that restrictions prohibiting the disclosure of information relating to a represented person under the Guardianship and Administration Act 1995 were removed last September.

Groombridge wants to see guardianship gag laws reformed across the country. However, in Tasmania, she says there’s “so much further to go”.

“While people can now freely consent to telling their own story, we are still hearing far too many similar stories. People are still being denied choice and agency in their own lives, under the guise of protecting them from harm.”

Guardianship gag laws across Australia

Tasmania and the ACT have different approaches compared with other states.

SBS contacted each jurisdiction and asked whether it supported reform to its current legislation.

An ACT Justice and Community Safety Directorate spokesperson confirmed there is no provision preventing the disclosure of identifying information about a person involved in such proceedings as a default position. The tribunal can make an order if the right to a public hearing is outweighed by competing interests, however.

In NSW, the NT and Queensland, the publication of proceedings that identify a represented person is prohibited. Different discretions are in place for tribunals to authorise publication, while there is no guidance on this in NSW.

A NSW Department of Communities and Justice spokesperson told SBS News the government “supports the overarching principle that a person to whom a guardianship or financial management order relates should be able to tell their story”, but that any amendment “would need to appropriately balance privacy concerns with this objective”.

The spokesperson said the government “will consider” the issue in light of recommendations from a NSW Law Reform Commission review.

Over the border in Queensland, a spokesperson for the Department of Justice told SBS News the state’s attorney-general is continuing to work with ministers to implement recommendations from the Disability Royal Commission, and that reforming confidentiality legislation “remains under consideration”.

An NT Department of Corrections spokesperson said the Public Guardian and Trustee is “supportive of sensible reform that would strengthen the promotion of the rights and dignity of people with disability who want to tell their story publicly”. Currently, there is no active or proposed review.

Meanwhile, in South Australia, a person must not publish a report of any guardianship or administration proceedings. Its tribunal can authorise publication, but only where it does not identify the protected person.

“Authorities have taken the view that this does not prevent a person from identifying themselves, or speaking publicly about their experiences within the guardianship system,” a spokesperson for the state’s attorney-general’s department said.

“Consideration is still being given to whether changes are needed to ensure that an individual’s right to speak about their experiences is protected while also ensuring sufficient safeguards are in place.”

A person looks out towards a city skyline.

Cartwright is setting his sights beyond Victoria, as reforms are being considered across the country. Credit: Otis Filley

In Western Australia, a person must not publish or broadcast any report that identifies or could lead to the identification of a protected person. There is no tribunal discretion under any circumstances.

A Department of Justice spokesperson said the state’s Law Reform Commission is currently conducting a review.