Independent Living Journal

Better Dead than Disabled?

2008-07-11T14:12:00.002+01:00

I have just read a shocking survey, commissioned by Disaboom, which suggests that more than half of Americans would rather die than live with a serious disability.

The research also showed that more affluent and more educated people were more likely to choose death over disability than those with lower incomes and poorer standards of education.

What on earth does this say about the United States? What would the results of a similar survey in Britain show? There may be very few but a militant minority who would actually choose disability rather than life without an impairment, but death rather than life? When we are surrounded by so many examples of people living fantastic, fulfilling lives despite serious disabilities?

I may not agree with their current political leadership, or their attitude to other countries' ability to manage their own internal affairs, but I have always thought of Americans as the ultimate "can-do" citizens. These are the people who believe in selling or spending their way out of economic downturns; who pity us poor Brits for failing to capitalise on our wonderful inventions; the home of the superhero, where any achievements are hailed with admiration, rather than envy or embarrassment.

So why are so many of them apparently ready to wimp out when it comes to dealing with disability? Is this a reflection of their inadequate public healthcare system, a general ignorance of the possibilities of independent living, or something else altogether?

What do you think? If you are affected by disability, please add your comments here - anonymously if you prefer - and we can compare our entirely unscientific survey of Independent Living visitors with our cousins across the water!

Heralding an end to ageism in the NHS

2008-06-27T10:54:00.003+01:00

Anyone who has achieved "retirement age" and had cause to visit their GP may well be aware of the rampant ageism within the NHS. One doctor at our own surgery was proposing a range of tests to identify the cause of my husband's sudden bout of exhaustion and weakness when he realised that he was 65, not 60 as he had thought, and changed his recommendations. No tests, just a prescription for a tonic and a suggestion that it was perfectly normal to feel like that at his age.

Although his manner was probably less subtle than the average, the message has been equally clearly received and understood by many older patients: if you are feeling unwell or in pain, it is very likely due to your age, and you needn't expect the over-burdened NHS to do much about it, now that you are no longer a productive member of society. Many of this generation, the last to be brought up with less confidence about their rights, have absorbed the message so well that they don't even bother to consult their GP, but simply live with conditions that limit their activities and enjoyment of life - and which could perhaps be ameliorated, if not cured.

So it was wonderful to hear that as part of its new anti-discrimination legislation, the government will make it illegal to refuse medical treatment on grounds of age. The new law will not, of course, endow the NHS with limitless funds, and hard choices will still have to be made, but hopefully they will be made on a case by case basis, rather than by reference to an arbitrary number.

Since ageism in the workplace became illegal two years ago, the number of people working beyond the official retirement ages of 60 for women and 65 for men has increased quite dramatically, with the number of older women in employment growing faster than any other group - 850,000 now; the highest since records began.

It is scarcely logical to treat individuals in one context as valuable members of a shrinking workforce, and in another as unwarranted burdens on an overstretched health service.

And can a society call itself civilised if it values people purely on their productivity anyway? The confused and frail old woman rendered passive by unnecessary antipsychotic drugs, or left dehydrated and malnourished by carers who have no time to care, could have been you or me yesterday. And unless we all act to change attitudes to the most vulnerable in our society, it may well be you or me tomorrow.

Have you contributed to the government's Independent Living strategy?

2008-06-10T11:45:00.009+01:00

Earlier this year, the government launched its Independent Living Strategy, a set of aspirations designed to work across government departments, in order to improve the life chances of disabled people. The broad aim of the Strategy is to remove barriers to disabled individuals exercising choice and control in areas such as housing, transport, health services, education and employment.

As many people have discovered, there is often quite a gap between national policy on Independent Living, and the reality on the ground - this strategy aims to fill the gap.

If you are wondering why I am writing now about a document published several months ago, it is simply because we are nearly at the end of the time allowed for consultation. Your comments need to reach the Office for Disability Issues by June 20th.

This seems a bold attempt to pull together the rather fragmentary policies and procedures that currently affect many lives, and one of those rare occasions when service users' opinions and ideas are actually being canvassed - and may even be acted on!

From the Executive Summary of the Independent Living Strategy (which you can download as a pdf by clicking here), here are the key points presented for feedback:

1. How best to involve disabled people, at a national level, in the monitoring of progress on implementation of the Independent Living Strategy, for example, by setting up an Independent Living Scrutiny Group.

2. We would welcome views on current arrangements for promoting the involvement of disabled people and their organisations and the contribution these arrangements may make to the monitoring of the Independent Living Strategy.

(The "current arrangements" include the Department of Health's aim to have a user-led organisation in every locality by 2010; the new performance framework for local government which encourages involvement of users in the commissioning and delivery of local services; and the Disability Equality Duty (DED) .)

3. There are many existing networks of disabled people which could be drawn together to provide a resource for the involvement of disabled people at local and regional levels in implementing the Independent Living Strategy. Is there a need for a “network of networks” to facilitate this?

4. The Independent Living Review’s Expert Panel advised of the importance of building leadership capacity amongst disabled people of all ages. They suggested that Partners in PolicymakingTM courses would be useful in promoting disabled people’s involvement in implementing the Strategy. Views are sought on current initiatives to build leadership capacity amongst disabled people, on whether further work should adapt the Partners in PolicymakingTM model, and/or whether there are other models that should be considered.

5. The Expert Panel identified a range of different mechanisms to support delivery of the Strategy. The Government Offices for the Regions play a key role and there is a need to assist them to support local strategic partnerships (LSPs) to deliver independent living policies, linking with user-led organisations, and monitoring implementation. We would welcome views on the best ways to assist implementation and monitoring of the Strategy at regional and local levels.

And finally, 6. Any other views on the Independent Living Strategy.

You should send your responses to:

Independent Living Strategy Consultation
Office for Disability Issues
Department for Work and Pensions
The Adelphi
1-11 John Adam Street
London WC2N 6HT
Telephone: 0207 712 2845
Textphone: 0207 712 2032
Fax: 0207 962 8096
Email: independent-living-review@dwp.gsi.gov.uk

As always, you can post any comments here too, for other Independent Living site visitors to read.

Wheelchairs with folding wheels - what do you think?

2008-05-13T13:04:00.006+01:00

An interesting new project came my way recently; a folding wheel - the Crossbreed - which is being developed by Duncan Fitzsimons at InnovationRCA, a product incubator unit at the Royal College of Art in London.

Initially designed for a bicycle, the Crossbreed wheel is now being adapted for wheelchairs, so that users can benefit from the easy manoeuvrability of large wheels with an integrated push rim, combined with the practicality of being able to fold the chair into a small package for transport and storage.

A wheelchair fitted with folding wheels could even allow a whole new type of wheelchair to be designed: one that can fold up into a small package similar to a golf bag in shape and size. This wheelchair could be as high performance as any other, yet fold up small enough to fit into an overhead locker on an airplane, wheels and all!

First models of this wheel will be made from carbon fibre composite, to meet the weight and stiffness requirements of the most demanding wheelchair users and Duncan hopes that these can be supplied at a cost which is as close as possible to non-folding high performance wheels. Further down the line he plans for a range of models to be made available for different budgets and performance needs.

You can find out more on the designer's website

What do you think about this idea? Is there room in the market for a wheelchair that folds much smaller than existing models? Or do you think that the current chairs with quick-release self-propelling wheels do a good enough job? Whatever your opinion, do please share it!

Piers Clough, an MBA student at Imperial College, has produced an online survey, to enable wheelchair users, carers and professionals to give their feedback. Click here to access it

"Shadows in Wonderland"

2008-03-20T09:34:00.005Z

I have been an avid reader for as long as I can remember, and even my day job, which involves trawling through articles, reports and media releases, many of them rather poorly written, has not killed my enthusiasm.

On the other hand, I probably wouldn't pick up a book about serious illness and hospitals if it hadn't come my way for review - but having started reading it, I found that I couldn't stop.

"Shadows in Wonderland" is written by Colin Ludlow and published by Hammersmith Press. It is his account of how he was found to be suffering from bowel cancer, his treatment at London's Royal Free Hospital, and how it all went terribly wrong. At the same time, it is a thoughtful analysis of the state of the health service in this country, how far apart are our expectations and the reality.

Colin Ludlow was a television producer before his illness, and his acute visual sense brings the hospital environment alive, in all its grimness. He makes the point, which had not occurred to me before, that our expectations of hospital are largely shaped by TV dramas, which condition us to expect a lot more action - and definite answers - than real-life medical treatment generally delivers.

His own experience, which he relates honestly and without self pity, is that medical interventions bring consequences, which may well be much worse than the patient imagines when starting their treatment. If we understood completely ahead of time, perhaps we would be much more reluctant collaborators in the process. So his initial surgery to remove a tumour in the bowel - a routine, albeit fairly major intervention - is followed by severe internal haemorrhaging, a dose of MRSA, and months of drip feeding, which sets off an unsurprising series of problems with his digestive system.

In reading this book, I learned that there is a word for illnesses caused by medics - iatrogenic - and also why it is necessary. The hospital environment itself, dreary, confusing and inadequately provided with simple facilities, such as comfortable waiting areas and natural light, is shown to be an obstacle to recovery. It is telling that the first time the writer finds himself in a hospital building which is bright, welcoming and restful, he realises that he is in a hospice wing for the terminally ill: you have to be dying before the NHS treats you like a human being.

"Shadows in Wonderland" is a compelling read, whether you are a healthcare professional or a "consumer" of the increasingly business-oriented NHS services. It clearly illustrates the fact that patients are more then just a set of medical conditions, and hospitals should be more than just a collection of facilities. Until we recognise this at the deepest level, treating the whole person in an environment that makes a positive contribution to wellness, the NHS is not likely to deliver the sort of results that we should aspire to as an affluent society in the 21st century.

In Sickness and in Health

2008-02-22T09:29:00.005Z

I spend rather more time reading and listening to the radio these days, as my arms remain determined to pursue their status as redundant appendages, rather than reliable tools. I continue as editor of this website, using iListen, voice recognition software, which despite hiccups along the way, as we learned to accommodate each other's foibles, has now become an indispensable part of my working life. Although still not 100 percent reliable, the fact that it can make possible a job that formerly required hours of keyboard and mouse use, is a testament to the progress that has been made in this area.

And when I heard Alan Johnson, the health secretary, announcing that in future doctors should be issuing well notes, rather than sick notes, to encourage employers and employees alike to think about what people could do, rather than what they couldn't, my own situation seemed to provide an interesting illustration.

Almost certainly, if I had an employer, they would have stopped me working many months ago, when overuse of the computer first made my hands and arms too painful to continue. Rest is always the first prescribed treatment for repetitive strain injuries, and - perhaps also with an eye on some very large tribunal awards for work-related disabilities - responsible employers take no chances with the long-term well-being of their people.

But not having an employer, I don't have anyone telling me I mustn't work. Independent Living is my passion, and I'm not about to relinquish it.

So, rather as the government minister is recommending that occupational therapists should be assessing how much and what type of work someone can do when they have been ill, I have run a uniquely qualified eye over my own situation, and acquired the necessary tools to help me keep working. I am not as productive as I used to be - but given that high productivity almost certainly contributed to the problem, maybe that isn't so bad. And most importantly, instead of adding mental health problems of stress and depression to my woes, I do wake up most mornings, focused on what I can do, rather than what I can't.

Fall Prevention - priorities

2008-01-21T10:04:00.000Z

"Fall prevention" is a subject that has exercised both the NHS and the government considerably in recent years. The National Service Framework for Older People includes prevention of falls as one of its "Standards", and health authorities around the country have been scrambling to develop Fall Prevention Strategies that demonstrate their focus on the problem.

Depending on whose figures you read, somewhere between a third and half of people over 65 suffer a fall in any given year, and the cost to the NHS of treating these fractures is very nearly £1 billion.

Preventing falls is clearly something that is well worth spending resources on, in financial terms alone, never mind the human costs of pain, lowered self-confidence, loss of mobility and independence.

And yet, all this high-powered attention has largely failed. The major effort has gone into osteoporosis screening and subsequent drug therapy for those identified as "at risk". Osteoporosis is a horrible condition, and there is no doubt that people whose vulnerability to it has been recognised will be grateful for the intervention. But the strategy has at least two weaknesses. Firstly, the test itself, which assesses bone mineral density (BMD), is not reliable, frequently either under- or over-estimating the condition, and therefore encouraging doctors to prescribe drug therapy for the wrong people. And secondly, the drugs - bisphosphonates- are quite expensive if over-prescribed. It has been calculated, for example, that the cost of preventing one hip fracture - the result of medicating 577 post-menopausal women for 12 months - is £120,000.

How does taking bisphosphonates stop you falling? The answer, of course, is that it doesn't. What it should do, is help to build up bone strength, so that the individual is less likely to suffer a fracture if they do fall. But as a means of preventing falls, it can have no value - and given that 80% of falls occur amongst people who don't have osteoporosis anyway, perhaps we should not be surprised that the overall strategy is not delivering the hoped-for results.

The real causes of falls are many, and can be complex. Certain illnesses, such as Parkinson's and Alzheimer's, bring an increased risk, as do some medications, notably antidepressants and diuretics, both of which are widely used in the most vulnerable age-group. Equally, there are many falls which could be avoided with a combination of exercise and commonsense. Exercise - and specifically gait-training - to improve strength, confidence and balance. Commonsense, to ensure that we remove hazards around the home (where most falls occur), such as rumpled rugs, trailing electrical flexes and general household clutter left in hallways.

Perhaps PCTs would do better to devote more of their resources to training their patients in how to keep themselves safe from falls, starting with those people most at risk due to medical conditions and medication regimes. Then we might see a real decline in the number of older people who lose their ability to live independently as the result of an accident.

You can read our guide to preventing and coping with falls here: Independent Living - fall prevention

Grasping the nettle of Incapacity Benefit

2007-11-21T11:17:00.000Z

The government is planning to introduce a new test for incapacity benefit. Commentary from groups representing disabled people has been almost universally hostile, and there are no doubt very real fears that pressure may be put on vulnerable people to take a job when they are not really able to cope. People with mental health problems and certain conditions with symptoms of varying intensity are likely to be most affected.

Currently, some 2.64 million people receive incapacity benefit; a figure significantly augmented by unspoken government policy over the years to keep unemployment figures at a respectable level by encouraging greater take up of incapacity benefit. In areas where jobs are in short supply, it is not unknown for as many as one in five of the working age population to be in receipt of this benefit.

Clearly, this nettle had to be grasped, and the government has been promising to do so for some time. I find the principle of introducing a test that focuses on what an individual can do, rather than what they can't, wholly admirable. It is surely right to work from a presumption of ability, rather than adopting a patronising attitude that people with disabilities are unable to make a contribution.

Since the Disability Discrimination Act became law, we have seen attitudes slowly changing. Businesses are much more aware of the needs of disabled consumers, and while the situation is far from perfect, it is significantly easier now for individuals with a range of impairments to access goods and services without a struggle. Places of work and education are required not to discriminate on the grounds of disability - if we make the case, rightly, to employers that disabled people have a lot to offer, surely we must apply the same criteria to judging the capabilities of an individual who is currently not in work.

All the research shows that people who work enjoy better health and well-being than those who remain on benefits for an extended period of time. And it is a fact that anyone who spends two years on incapacity benefit is more likely to retire or die than to find a job. This has to be changed.

When I wrote recently about the dangers of positive discrimination, the response was pretty mixed, with a number of disabled people saying that they found it so hard to get a job, they'd take any assistance that was offered. I still believe that the risks inherent in ringfencing jobs for individuals with disabilities outweigh any benefits, but at the same time, society must work to remove obstacles in the path to employment. A test that focuses on abilities, rather than incapacities, allied to a support system that will genuinely assist individuals in obtaining the skills and confidence they need to return to work, is surely a step in the right direction.

Your power chair - mobility aid or obstruction?

2007-10-12T12:52:00.001+01:00

In response to my recent article in the Spinal Injuries Association magazine concerning changes to EU legislation on wheelchair accessible vehicles (WAVs), Chris Povey has contributed the following article, which sets out one man's so far unsuccessful quest for a suitable powerchair to use as a "drive from" as well as for normal daily activities:-

Chris Povey writes:

"The part of the article where you suggest that wheelchair manufacturers might put disclaimer clauses on their products, rather than going to the expense of modifying them for use in a vehicle is, I feel, the real issue - namely the design of wheelchairs, be they powered or pushers, is wholly unsuitable for users' needs.

I drive a Braun converted Voyager from a powered wheelchair. I have noted/complained about/searched for a solution to the trend for chairs to increase in size and weight since the mid 90s. My last adequate one was the first mark Cheetah: since then seat heights have risen so I could not get knees under hand controls; frame widths compromise side entry (let alone using toilets); total weight makes overcoming steps by man-handling a health & safety issue.

I currently use an obsolete Invacare Twister, modified by a local bike co-op and an auto engineer to address the problems I found with the original design.

For my last vehicle I decided I wanted, after thirty odd years of absence, a head restraint. This could not be fitted to the vehicle, so I pushed for one attached to the wheelchair - if it could be moved out of the way for normal living. Nothing exists in the market so the vehicle converter made one out of a spare ramp actuator. This has worked perfectly for two years.

I then decided to design my own wheelchair seat with the minimum features needed to live all waking hours in the same seat. It would need to pass vehicle crash testing, and more importantly, survive day to day living and be easily repaired. I based my design on high grade, light, strong marine and climbing components, mostly aluminium and titanium. The maximum width is 57 cms (actually it can be less - probably 55 cms - I want to increase comfort by having a wider than normal cushion).

The rising headrest has been incorporated with smaller, lighter actuators and designed so that it rises in an arc to position itself better. The armrests have been the hardest parts to design, probably because I have set myself very difficult requirements.

They must be operable in the dark, one handed with spinal injury C5/6 dexterity. They must work from a single pillar set well back so that the vehicle seat belt works optimally for crash testing.

Another major design problem has been to remove welds, as these break down on armrests.

The original intention was to make a couple of these seats, then transfer them to power bases for the rest of my life. The original fabrication costs (£4000 - £5000) would be absorbed over that period by cheaper bases, which from past experience last about three years.

In Autumn of 2005 I met the CEO of Dundee-based manufacturers, Lomax Mobility at a function, and was very surprised to see that the base of their Powermax wheelchair would nearly fit my requirements.

I negotiated with their engineers that I would get the seat fabricated if they would modify the Powermax frame so it would offer a lower seat option. Their technology is old but reliable; I was willing to sacrifice range for reliability and a very small footprint of chair.

Lomax were then taken over by Sunrise Medical, who shelved the project. Had it continued as I wanted, there would now be a working, marketable, small footprint powerchair admirably suited to the 'drive from wheelchair' option. It would have an integral, retractable headrest; repositioning of seat tilt and back incline - all features vital for a reasonable cost "travel in vehicle" wheelchair. Equally, it would fit easily into a metro-type taxi, would be light enough to avoid breaking its ramp, and would be manoeuvrable into the rearward-facing position required by taxi insurance. The headrest in up position would prevent what I am assured by a vehicle crash testing expert is the inevitable decapitation of a wheelchair user in a forward shunt accident in a taxi.

My design for the ultimate seat on a Lomax base was only the first step. I want a long-range variant. I will probably have to design a base as well, using lithium batteries in a container which can hold two chargers, to run in parallel for fastest charging; transfer board; tools; and spares. The footprint will be as small as possible, for train/bus/taxi travel. The total target weight including batteries is less than 70 kg.

After that I would want to increase the maximum speed so that the powerchair can use cycle paths. The objective being that an urban user should not need private transport - looking towards the day when buses are required to become DDA compliant. From talking to people who are working on projects to motorise such modes of transport as bicycles and rickshaws, it appears that it is cheaper and lighter to buy volts rather than amps; so the motors on powered wheelchairs need to run at much higher voltages.

I want to simplify chair controls. I only need two settings: one to carry drinks and the other to avoid able bodied people who step in my way without looking. The first requires very low acceleration settings, the second requires extremely high settings. A possible third for higher speed on cycle ways will suffice.

I don't need lights, indicators, horns, or seat positioning on the main controller; if you want them, then have them as separate remote/radio controlled units.

What we need is simple, reliable, easy-to-use controllers that won't go 'rogue' as can happen with some more complex units. I don't want seat risers, pneumatic tyres, automatic brakes, suspension, kerb
climbers etc.

I want to use pub toilets, even with a guard on the door - not their car parks. I want to get my knees under restaurant tables. I want to get into those pubs and restaurants in my powerchair - even if they have steps.

The problem is that Sunrise, Invacare, Pride, Balder, Permobil etc do not seem interested in designing to do these things. In my experience, it's not the engineers in these companies that are the problem. They have generally given me pretty good service when necessary.

It appears to be the more peripheral departments, like marketing and legal, who want ever heavier, more stable machines with extravagant options such as suspension, seat risers and standing facilities.

Maybe we the users and our professional advisers are the culprits: we have forgotten that wheelchairs are primarily mobility aids for going to places - and increasing the weight and size cuts down the number of places we can get to."

Carers and Caring

2007-09-25T14:46:00.000+01:00

September is rushing by at even more than its customary speed - after the more languid months of summer, everything seems to move up a gear at this time of year. One of the customary markers on the calendar for those of us with an interest in independent living is conspicuous by its absence this time round. I'm talking of course about the annual exhibition which shares our name, and has been held regularly at various London venues until the last event staged in 2006.

Whether this absence represents a hole in your diary or a welcome reprieve from what seems to be an ever increasing roster of exhibitions will depend on many factors. Personally, I have definitely been suffering from exhibition overload in the last few years, and this seems to be a feeling shared by many businesses in our industry, who find themselves trying to stretch their marketing budget around an increasing number of shows, which may or may not deliver the audience they are seeking.

Visitors also are expressing their interest in less stressful forms of research, with a growing enthusiasm for online, virtual events, where they can catch up with the latest news in the comfort of their own home or office, and at a time that suits them.

For Age Concern, last week was "silver surfer week" - a time to highlight increasing internet use by older people. The driver for this rush into new technology is, apparently, the desire to stay in touch with grandchildren who probably don't live nearby as they did in earlier generations. Internet, email and mobile phones are therefore essential tools. Whatever the reasons, the over-65s now spend more time on the web than the 18 - 24s, making products and services of interest to this group a real growth area.

Carers have been very much in the news recently - and there are perhaps a few small signs that they are moving up the political agenda as well. Such a large group of people, who are estimated to save the country as much money as the entire NHS budget - £87 billion - every year, certainly should be receiving rather more attention. Already, ten percent of the population is caring on an informal basis for a friend or family member who can't manage alone: as increasing numbers of us develop diseases such us Alzheimer's, this percentage is bound to grow.

Caring for each other, gladly and without expecting recompense, is an important part of the glue that holds society together: as we see it become increasingly fragmented and dysfunctional, it seems ever more vital to cherish those elements that still work. Even if it was affordable, can you imagine anything more soulless than a world where all care was delivered professionally and in an institutional setting?

Don't forget that we have an extensive area on the site dedicated to resources for carers

Please let us know if you come across any useful products or services that aren't yet included. And of course we always want to hear about your personal experiences, good or bad.

Please feel free to add your comments here.

World Alzheimer's Day - 21st September

2007-09-06T12:01:00.000+01:00

As we approach World Alzheimer's Day, on the 21st September, it is sobering to think that dementia is now second only to heart disease as a cause of death in Great Britain. And yet £5.5 million is spent on Alzheimer's research in a year, compared to the £188 million spent annually on cancer - now nudged into third place in the league of killer diseases.

An estimated 800,000 people in Britain are currently suffering from dementia - and will eventually be killed by it. This is the illness that we most fear developing as we grow older, and yet NICE has decided that sufferers in the early stages of dementia should not receive treatments costing £2.50 a day which can slow down the development of symptoms. This decision was recently upheld by a judicial review, even though the drugs in question are widely available to sufferers in other parts of Europe.

Six million people in Britain currently act as informal carers for friends or relatives who are unable to live independently without support. Demographic changes are bound to have an impact, as longer lifespans bring a steady increase in the number of people suffering from age-related conditions such as Alzheimer's.

There are no cures, and so far, few effective treatments, a situation that can only improve slowly, if at all, while dementia remains the cinderella branch of medical research.

At the same time, there is a big question mark over the standard of care offered to sufferers. A survey last month suggested that nearly 60 percent of nurses would not report abuse of an elderly patient or care home resident, through fear of making an incorrect accusation or of reprisals. The same survey found that more than 10 percent of the nurses would not want one of their own relatives to be cared for in the institution where they work.

No wonder fear of finding ourselves increasingly frail and helpless as we get older is so prevalent!

So what can we do? First of all, on a personal level, we can make it less likely that we will develop dementia. Eating a healthy diet, high in fruit and vegetables and low in saturated fats, is a first step, along with giving up smoking and drinking alcohol moderately. There is good evidence that remaining physically active helps, as well as exercising mental faculties and maintaining social activities.

More money for research will depend on making dementia more compelling as a cause. Goodness knows, that should not be hard, given the statistics, but it is still the case that heart disease and cancer are the automatic choices of many when deciding where donations should be made. And as for the NHS - one articulate, high-profile cancer victim seems better able to influence spending decisions than an army of carers and dementia sufferers who tend to remain largely invisible.

We can make it clear to the government that more money needs to be spent on dementia care by supporting the campaigning organizations such as the Alzheimer's Society and Alzheimer Europe.

Politicians probably don't need reminding that older people are the most consistent voters: the party which pledges adequate resources to deal with a condition affecting one in 14 of the over-65s, one in six of the over-80s, is likely to see the benefits in the ballot box.

Disabled Workers' Co-operative

2007-09-03T11:40:00.000+01:00

You may well have come across the Disabled Workers' Co-operative during the last couple of years: project manager, Neil Wood-Gaiger, has been tireless in raising awareness of their work as widely as possible.

The charity was set up with lottery funding as a forum for disabled people to advertise their skills and for employers to find qualified and motivated applicants for their vacancies.

There has been considerable debate recently - both here and elsewhere - about the rights and wrongs of positive discrimination. There is absolutely no doubt though, that many disabled people find it extremely difficult to get a job, and a service such as the Disabled Workers' Co-operative, which provides an opportunity for workers and employers to make contact, must be a useful addition to the employment market.

I have just heard from Neil that the project is in a financial crisis. Since their funding contract ended at the beginning of the year, they have kept going on their small reserves and the goodwill of the people involved - a situation that couldn't last for very long. Although they hope to obtain some European funding next year, this is not certain, and in any case they are facing financial difficulties right now.

If you feel able to help with a financial contribution, I know that it will be much appreciated and well spent. It seems a real shame that all the hard work and hopes of the last few years should go to waste.

This is a link to their website www.disabledworkers.org.uk where you can read more about their work and how to help.

If you currently have a job available, advertising it here is a great way of demonstrating your commitment to equality of opportunities. If you are disabled and would like to be more fully occupied, you can list your skills in an arena where potential clients or employers can readily find you. There are opportunities for voluntary work too, if earning is not a prerequisite.

An extra burden for parents of disabled children

2007-08-07T12:11:00.000+01:00

Children are expensive - and the parents of disabled children have many extra costs in addition to those faced by every family.

A nasty extra surprise may be in store for families with teenagers, as local authorities are now able to charge for transport costs to special schools once the students are aged over 16.

Parents often find the that they have to travel a considerable way in order to find a school or college that meets the needs of their disabled child: the nearest school is often just not an option. So it seems pretty tough to present them with a bill for transport when they really have little choice in the matter, and especially when the government is trying to encourage everybody to remain in full-time education until at least the age of 18.

In rural areas particularly, this extra cost can be quite heavy.

If you agree that this places an unfair burden on families, you can sign the petition that has been set up on Downing Street website:

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/disabledtravel/

And let us know what you think! Anyone can comment on any story posted here - just click the button and have your say.

What do you think about positive discrimination?

2007-08-03T18:45:00.000+01:00

"Make disability news" goes the headline in the sits. vac. entry for an editor for Disability Now, billed as the UK’s leading disability monthly.

It sounds a great job for anyone with a passionate interest in people, society, the news and issues that shape the lives of disabled people, carers, campaigners...

But read the small print, and you realise that it isn't a job for anyone who fits the criteria - no matter how well qualified you may be, there's no point applying unless you are also disabled.

"Time to get equal" says Scope - but when did positive discrimination ever improve the situation for any minority? You've only to look at the media coverage of female Labour MPs who were elected on the basis of their gender in Labour's '97 election landslide to see that nobody benefits from such attempts at social engineering, however well-intentioned. Those who are arbitrarily excluded feel rightly resentful; those given preference must surely ask themselves whether they would have achieved their position on their own merits. And they must continually sell themselves to sceptical colleagues - a tiring distraction from the task in hand.

So what is Disability Now thinking of? It cannot surely be that only disabled people have an insight into issues of disability and equality. What about the parent who has negotiated the maze of social services, education and healthcare on behalf of their disabled child? Or anyone who has cared for a family member with a long-term illness or disability? Are their experiences less appropriate? How about people with professional or commercial experience? Therapists, teachers, specifiers... still not relevant?

Perhaps this is why the DN post has remained unfilled for so long: the people with the necessary skills and talents would really prefer to be selected on ability, not disability.