Table 5.8: Barriers to obtaining assistance from any adviser, all six LGAs, 2003
| Type of barrier |
Events where help sought
|
|
|
No.
|
%
|
|
| No problem |
770
|
61.8
|
| Telephone engaged/on hold too long |
229
|
18.4
|
| Delay in getting response |
212
|
17
|
| Difficulty getting an appointment |
137
|
11
|
| Lack of local services/couldn’t get there |
101
|
8.1
|
| Problem with opening hours |
95
|
7.6
|
| Difficulty affording it |
75
|
6
|
| Difficulty understanding advice/information |
58
|
4.7
|
| No ability to access the internet |
30
|
2.4
|
| Embarrassed to be seen using services |
22
|
1.8
|
| English language problems |
19
|
1.5
|
| Inadequate/incorrect information/advice |
17
|
1.4
|
| Adviser reluctant/refused to help |
13
|
1
|
| Adviser/service had limited power to help |
11
|
0.9
|
| Other |
19
|
1.5
|
Table 5.9 presents the barriers to obtaining assistance according to the type of adviser used. This table is based on the 929 events where only one adviser was used.19 No barriers were reported in approximately four-fifths or more of the events where participants sought help from friends or relatives, but in approximately two-thirds or less of the events where they sought help from other advisers. The barriers reported in obtaining assistance from a traditional legal adviser were not strikingly different from those reported in relation to other advisers. However, there was a tendency for slightly higher percentages of respondents using a traditional legal adviser to report difficulty affording the advice (10.1% for traditional legal advisers compared with 3.7–6.9% for other advisers) and a lack of locally available services (10.1% for traditional legal advisers compared with 1.7–8.1% for other advisers).
Table 5.9: Barriers to obtaining assistance from sole adviser by type of adviser, all six LGAs, 2003
| Type of barrier |
% of events where adviser used
|
||||||||
|
Traditional legala
|
Lawyer friend/relative
|
Publishedb
|
LEGAL ADVISERc
|
Other friend/ relative
|
Governmentd
|
Police/complaint handing
|
Othere
|
NON-LEGAL ADVISERf
|
|
| No problem |
69.7
|
87.9
|
69.7
|
75.3
|
79.2
|
60.6
|
50
|
69.4
|
67.8
|
| Telephone engaged/on hold too long |
12.1
|
5.2
|
18.2
|
11.1
|
8.3
|
24.4
|
26.9
|
11.9
|
14.7
|
| Delay in getting response |
10.1
|
3.4
|
6.1
|
7.4
|
11.1
|
19.4
|
23.1
|
12.9
|
14.5
|
| Difficulty getting an appointment |
9.1
|
3.4
|
3
|
6.3
|
4.2
|
12.5
|
7.7
|
7.7
|
8.4
|
| Lack of local services/couldn’t get there |
10.1
|
1.7
|
3
|
6.3
|
4.2
|
8.1
|
3.8
|
5
|
5.5
|
| Problem with opening hours |
5.1
|
3.4
|
0
|
3.7
|
4.2
|
8.8
|
7.7
|
5.6
|
6.2
|
| Difficulty affording it |
10.1
|
5.2
|
6.1
|
7.9
|
6.9
|
3.8
|
3.8
|
3.7
|
4.1
|
| Difficulty understanding advice/information |
3
|
0
|
6.1
|
2.6
|
4.2
|
5.6
|
3.8
|
1.9
|
3
|
| No ability to access the internet |
2
|
0
|
6.1
|
2.1
|
0
|
3.1
|
0
|
1.9
|
1.9
|
| Embarrassed to be seen using services |
0
|
1.7
|
0
|
0.5
|
1.4
|
1.3
|
0
|
0.6
|
0.8
|
| English language problems |
0
|
1.7
|
0
|
0.5
|
0
|
1.3
|
0
|
1.7
|
1.4
|
| Inadequate/incorrect information/advice |
1
|
0
|
0
|
0.5
|
0
|
1.3
|
3.8
|
0.8
|
0.9
|
| Adviser reluctant/refused to help |
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
1.3
|
0
|
1.2
|
1.1
|
| Adviser/service had limited power to help |
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
0
|
2.5
|
0
|
0.6
|
0.9
|
| Other |
0
|
1.7
|
0
|
0.5
|
1.4
|
0.6
|
7.7
|
1.2
|
1.4
|
| No. of events |
99
|
58
|
33
|
190
|
72
|
160
|
26
|
481
|
739
|
Distance
Table 5.10 shows the distance participants travelled to obtain help from the sole or most useful adviser, by type of region. Overall, participants obtained help without travelling for 44.0 per cent of the legal events where help was sought.20 In many cases, this finding reflects events where help was sought from friends, relatives or the internet, and in other cases is likely to reflect instances where participants obtained information, advice or assistance via the telephone.21 However, in 4.9 per cent of events where help was sought, participants travelled more than 80 kilometres.
A chi-square test was conducted to test whether the distance travelled to obtain assistance depended on whether participants lived in Sydney, the provincial LGA of Newcastle or one of the rural/remote LGAs surveyed. Not surprisingly, the chi-square was significant. Whereas Sydney and Newcastle residents were required to travel over 20 kilometres in response to only 6.5 per cent of the events where they sought help, residents of the rural/remote areas were required to travel over 20 kilometres in response to one-quarter of the events where they sought help. In 12.1 per cent of cases where residents of the rural/remote areas sought help, they travelled over 80 kilometres.
Table 5.10: Distance travelled to obtain assistance from sole or most useful adviser by type of region, all six LGAs, 2003
| Distance travelled (kilometres) |
Sydney (Campbelltown, Fairfield & South Sydney LGAs)
|
Provincial (Newcastle LGA)
|
Rural/remote (Nambucca and Walgett LGAs)
|
All six LGAs
|
||||
|
No. of events
|
% of events
|
No. of events
|
% of events
|
No. of events
|
% of events
|
No. of events
|
% of events
|
|
| Didn’t need to travel |
309
|
48.1
|
71
|
35.5
|
169
|
41.6
|
549
|
44
|
| < 3 |
137
|
21.3
|
41
|
20.5
|
67
|
16.5
|
245
|
19.6
|
| 4–10 |
112
|
17.4
|
51
|
25.5
|
34
|
8.4
|
197
|
15.8
|
| 11–20 |
42
|
6.5
|
24
|
12
|
36
|
8.9
|
102
|
8.2
|
| 21–80 |
38
|
5.9
|
5
|
2.5
|
51
|
12.6
|
94
|
7.5
|
| 81+ |
4
|
0.6
|
8
|
4
|
49
|
12.1
|
61
|
4.9
|
| Total |
642
|
100
|
200
|
100
|
406
|
100
|
1248
|
100
|
Special services
Participants were also asked whether they needed access to any special services in order to obtain assistance from any adviser they used (see Table 5.11). Special services were required in order to obtain assistance in response to 4.8 per cent (59) of the events where participants sought help.22 The special services that participants reported requiring included medical or counselling help or assistance, home visits or special transport, financial help or assistance, help reading or understanding complex information, wheelchair access, an interpreter, a place for children to play and access to an outreach service.
Participants who reported requiring special services were asked whether they managed to obtain these services. These services were obtained for 71.2 per cent (42) of the 59 events where participants required special services.
Table 5.11: Special services required to obtain assistance from any adviser, all six LGAs, 2003
| Type of special service | Events where help sought | |
|
No.
|
%
|
|
| No special service required |
1161
|
95.2
|
| Medical/counselling help/assistance |
16
|
1.3
|
| Home visit or special transport |
8
|
0.7
|
| Financial help/assistance |
8
|
0.7
|
| Help reading/understanding complex information |
6
|
0.5
|
| Wheelchair access |
4
|
0.3
|
| An interpreter |
4
|
0.3
|
| Place for children to play |
3
|
0.2
|
| Outreach service |
2
|
0.2
|
| Othera |
15
|
1.2
|