When is impartial advice not impartial?

I make no apology for returning to a subject that I've touched on before, when it is something as important as choosing the right mobility aid. The Independent Living website only exists to provide as much information as possible, so that anyone looking for assistance in any area of daily life can inform themselves of the choices available. Equally, where there is more than one possible solution, we always recommend that the user should "try before they buy" - preferably in a non-pressured environment, such as a Disabled Living Centre.

This is one of the reasons why we are concerned about the involvement of supermarkets in selling mobility aids, since it is bound to lead to people picking products off the shelf, without either knowing that what they are buying is the most suitable for them, or indeed that there are alternatives to what they see on display.

But we have recently become aware of an even more potentially hazardous marketing technique, namely the peddling of what purports to be impartial information, but which is actually only promoting the products of, and generating leads for, one supplier. We have seen examples relating to products from stairlifts to mobility scooters, and unless the reader had good knowledge of the market, they would probably not realise that they were being misinformed about product options, and directed towards a particular supplier who might not actually be the best option in their particular circumstances. What is worse, in order to receive the information, the enquirer is required to give personal contact details, and can no doubt look forward to a follow-up call with a persuasive sales pitch....

As always, it seems that the onus is on the buyer to practise constant vigilance; not to take information at face value; and to dig below the surface of any useful-sounding "free" offer - even if it is something as innocuous as free information. Somehow, that pamphlet has been paid for, and if it is not immediately obvious how, then you should probably be a bit suspicious about the motives of the supplier.

Sadly, many of the people looking for aids to mobility and daily living, are, by definition, more likely to be frail and/or vulnerable to high-pressure sales techniques. Perhaps the "good guys" in the industry - of whom there are many - should get together to stamp out promotional practices that are calculated to mislead?

Let us know what you think! You can post your comments, anonymously if you prefer, below.

 

 

Supermarkets Selling Mobility and Daily Living Aids

Two major supermarkets, Asda and the Co-op, have both recently launched into the sale of mobility and daily living aids. The attractions for them are quite clear - we all know about the demographic shift which is growing this market as longevity increases and the post-war baby boomers become pensioners, demanding an increasing range of products to help maintain independence and quality of life.

Having already diversified successfully from their core food lines, where competition is fierce and margins narrow, into areas such as fashion, electronics and homewares, the supermarkets are keen to repeat the trick, using their strong branding and purchasing power to develop new and profitable ranges. Which in some ways is fine - as consumers we have certainly benefitted from the might of the big retailers driving down the cost of our weekly shop and increasing the variety of goods we can conveniently buy under one roof.

There are some daily living aids which fit perfectly well into the supermarket model, such as easy grip utensils, big button phones and remote controls, bath rails and non-slip mats - but I really think we need to ask the question: should walking aids, for example, be regarded as just another product to pick off the shelf along with the washing powder and coffee? Given that somebody who is looking to buy a walking frame necessarily has difficulties walking, and that choosing the wrong one could cause them additional problems, should we not be ensuring that they can talk to someone who is well-trained in assessing such needs and recommending a suitable solution, rather than leaving them to take whatever their local supermarket has decided to stock?

Co-op Xest, the website and catalogue via which the Co-op is selling their range, does not include wheelchairs: interviewed by the BBC, their spokesperson said: “... we are not selling wheelchairs and we have just under 1000 products, but wheelchairs are not amongst them because of the specialist advice that you need.”

Asda, on the other hand, appears to have no such qualms - visitors to the 75 stores piloting the sale of mobility products will be able to buy a wheelchair for significantly less than £100. Their spokesperson indicated that giving specialist advice would not be a problem as he expected their customers would obtain the necessary information from the NHS before purchasing from them. An interesting idea, but one that doesn't really stand up to close scrutiny. Will checkout staff be asking buyers whether they obtained appropriate advice before going to the supermarket? And how will they know whether the product they have selected accords with that advice?

This is just the latest example of major mainstream brands rushing to grab their slice of the apparently lucrative special needs market: we have already seen it with bed and easychair suppliers and bathroom manufacturers. You can certainly argue that the increased competition has done wonders for aesthetics: today's mobility and daily living aids bear no resemblance to the ugly functionality of a decade or so ago. But the cost has been an increase in inappropriate selling techniques, with vulnerable people spending significant amounts on products that are unsuitable for them, because the supplier is more concerned with making a sale than meeting the user's needs.

Having spent twenty years in this business; ten of them editing the Independent Living website, advising people always to make sure that they try a range of mobility products - ideally in an impartial environment such as a Disabled Living Centre - before buying, I am more than a little concerned at the involvement of the supermarkets. Selling mobility aids is about more than simply shifting boxes, and I think we all need to give this new development some careful thought, rather than sleepwalking into a situation where giant retail chains become the 100lb gorilla in this special market.

 

 

Your power chair - mobility aid or obstruction?

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."