Disabled people are people not performing seals

On the This Morning website there is a little girl with autism doing the Big Ben bongs. I have nothing against the little girl, and as a child I liked copying the bongs too. I didn't do it on TV, it was just a child playing as this is. She wants to live in the clock and be the gongs, no more than childhood fantasy.

Why has she been allowed to do this publicly? I can hear the laughter and see the looks of pity as I write. The little girl is being used as an object of redicule, and somehow its ok because she lives with autism? No absolutely not,  they are using autism to use her, for entertainment, if thats what its called. Autism is being used as an excuse by the adults to make this seem ok, but it isn't.

Disabled people are often viewed as cute, or amazing if they do quite ordinary things. People wonder how we manage and see fit to comment or even watch. I call this performing seal syndrome, treating disabled people not as a person, but as an object. This mindset and the  This Morning stunt add to the negative view of those with disabilities by society. Do most people ask how abled bodied adults make coffee or cook food? No, so why is it ok to subject disabled people to this? Would This Morning have done this if she didn't live with autism? If they would, and I doubt it, why was autism even mentioned?

Disabled people will only have real rights and equality when the standards of what is socially acceptable behaviour towards others are the same whether interacting with disabled or non disabled people. It is not ok to ask those with disabilities personal  questions, or comment on what they do if it wouldn't be seen as appropriate if asking an able bodied person.

The video

Not everyone is the same

Depression and for that matter any mental health condition is as individual as the people who live with it.

Making assumptions that people can't do those things or that they can does them a disservice and is disrespectful. In reality  many may be able to do these things or others, to varying degrees on some days, if they can't on others, perhaps with support or adjustment. Many have good and bad days but what this means is individual too. Just because someone can work or go shopping it doesn't mean their condition isn't serious or real, just they can do that at that moment. Similarly someone who can't isn't giving up, not capable, or not trying, they just can't do it now.

It isn't helpful to say cheer up, take exercise or change your diet, for example, its a serious health condition and feeling better may take a long time. Better may also not mean not having any symptoms, or never havig it again.  Better is relative and different for everyone.  Each person knows their situation and needs best.

Talking about mental health ends stigma and helps others do the same.

Action not reflection needed

As civil servants faced the UN Committee on the Rights of Disabled People and faced criticism, the Government have pledged to reflect on its failure to engage with disabled people and their organisations.  It is nowhere near enough, and lack of engagement is not the only serious failing

After tens of thousands of deaths, and many more disabled and vulnerable people seriously harmed urgent action is needed to stop further welfare related deaths.

The Govenment has a record of hiding death rates and other information that hides the truth of the dangers of this regime. It is currently pursuing court action to hide a Work Capability Assessment outcome report in order to protect commercisl.inrerests. Those who facilitate this regime should not be protected, those subject to the risks of it must be.

Many of those subject to the punitive regime had genuine reasons for not complying. Some were in hospital seriously ill, even close to death, or they had already died before being sanctioned. Some had appointments cancelled or rearranged by contractors but still face sanctions for not attending the original assessment. Othera had genuine disability related reasons such as mental health that affected their ability to comply, not being able to read letters, or not being able to access assistance with claims. This is meant to allowed for instead many were sactioned. Not having money to pay rent or buy food puts people at serious risk. Many have lost their homes or been malnourished, some starved to death.

A court decison found those needing assistance because of psychological distress should qualify for PIP, or get increased payments. The government response was to change criteria to exclude those claiments from PIP. Other such changes have been made when Government decided too many people qualified under equipment provisions.

Many Government policies involving cuts  have been aimed at disabled and vulnerable people and despite many demands the Govern refused to carry out a culmative risk assessment.

There were concerns about the effects of the WCA expressed, and known to the Government they were ignored, many claimaints paid the ultimate price.

David Gauke, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, lied in parliament only recently that PIP appeals were low, on the day they reached record levels. Around 2/3 are successful. They clearly want to hide the fact the system is failing, and more so that challenges to it are mainly successful.

The time for reflection is over, there must be speedy and definite action to correct a system that causes serious harm to those it is designed to support. The welfare system itself is not fit for work. This must stop, there must be no more deaths.

Source Disability News Service

Carers must be cared for too.

A carer commited suicide, his inquest was last week. He could no longer cope with the stress of caring. I ask who cares for carers?

Unpaid carers, usually family members provide support for elderly and disabled people, they save public money because often it cuts the amount of formal support the person they care for needs. They themselves may have health issues, be disabled or elderly but are they properly supported?

Carers allowance if they qualify, perhaps topped 12up with means-tested benefits, often not. Carers Allowance is around £62  per week, not enough to live on, to qualify among, other conditions carers must care for at least 35 hours a week, many are doing far more, many are on hand and care much of 24/7. Some are called for Work focused interviews to 'prepare' for work, its planning what they could do to go back to work  It totally ignores the fact that another person relies on them, and adds to the stress of their role. For most working is neither practical or possible. Some work alongside being a carer.

They may be offered respite, a break from caring, this could be a few hours, or the person they support may have an overnight stay somewhere, one or several nights at a time. Carers are entitled to a social services 11 assessment of their own needs, and a support plan. Cuts mean most don't get enough provision, if any, and it usually isn't flexible enough to give real choice about when they get a break.  In addition not enough funded support  for the person needing care adds to a carers responsibilities. 

Many areas have support groups or other provision for carers, often provided by charities but lack of funds has forced many to close or reduce what they offer.

Carers are a valuable resource but their value is not respected by this Government. If carers didn't carry out their role it would cost much more to provide the replacement services. If carers are themselves in crisis then they cannot continue and emergency provision often costs more than standard care, and may not meet all of someone's needs. It is short sighted and reckless not to provide a proper income, flexible resipite and emotional support to carers because it puts them and vulnerable people at serious risk of harm.

Story source Huffpost

No more welfare deaths, act now

David Metcalf had  mental health conditions that meant he could not work for nine years. He was found dead on a beach after his sickness benefits were stopped.The coroner gave an open verdict unsure if Mr Metcalf had meant to enter the water. He had recently been seen by mental workers and police after concerns were raised after  he gave personal documents to someone saying he didn't need them anymore. I hope he rests in peace.

He is just one of tens of thousands of people who have died shortly after their benefits have stopped. Some committed suicide, some died of their assessed conditions, having been assessed as fit for work, or having lost disability benefits because they were no longer deemed to have the appeopriate care and mobility needs to qualify. Many thousands more hsve suffered serious harm for the same reasons, either by self harm or because their assessed conditions have worsened through being made to seek or undertake work, or not having the care or mobility support they need. How many more will be allowed to die or be harmed?

The Government know that concerns have been raised about the WCA the test for ESA, and that appeals against PIP decisons are at their highest levels with around two thirds having benefits reinstated or increased. The Government is being investigated by the UN for human rights abuse of disabled people. The Government have, and continue to hide damaging welfare statistics that would tell the truth about their dangerous regime.

If this isn't enough for them to be stopped nothing ever will be. If people aren't angry enough to fight for rights it will be too late. There must be no more deaths, too many have paid with their lives. Nobody can predict if they will ever need the support of the welfare state, if we don't act now future claimants may not survive the experience.

If only they listened.

If any group of workers is likely to have contact with disabled people regularly its probably healthcare workers so why do so many of them lack basic disability and mental health  awareness?

Today I had a routine over 50s mammogram. Its unpleasant anyway but but my experience had added extras, my carer being refused entry to the room when I needed assistance, them trying to dismantle my chair, when I said no, and when I said hospitals sometimes trigger my PTSD telling me not to be scared. My carer was allowed in after they realised my chair wouldn't come apart, to assist me to transfer, only for us to be told how we should do it, we just carried on regardless. She also supported me when they ignored the fact my sitting balance isn't that good when I told them this.

A few days ago an OT thought it was a good idea if someone accompanied me to a wheelchair assessment to help me choose a chair. This was after she agreed what my needs were and said I obviously knew what I needed.

A few months ago a nurse at a different surgery in the group I go to asked to speak to my carers after I said that going to the surgery increased my anxiety. I said I was alone, she said no you can't be, people like you have to be made to come.

I've had some fantastic care some staff always go tbe extra mile when needed but the less good staff detract from the good experiences. Disabled people or anyone with additional needs are people and deserve the best quaulity of care as does  anyone else. I only ask that they listen and work with us, we are the experts on our own situation.

Strictly no tokenism or sympathy votes thanks

Paralympian Jonnie Peacock is reportedly taking part in this years strictly come dancing, the first disabled contestant on the main show.

I welcome the real inclusion of disabled people in mainstream programmes, it makes disabilty seem just an every day event and makes it visible. Being part of a popular entertainment programme not related to disability is a good thing if its presented appropriately.

The voting system concerns me though. I hope he gets votes because he is good, because he deserves to and not just because he is disabled. British audiences are known for liking those they view as the underdog. This could actually harm the cause of disabled people, rather than further it, the sympathy factor has much to do with the negative attitude that disabled people  aren't real people, and not capable of real lives, with appropriate support, just like everyone else.

Why has he been asked, and given the length of time its been broadcast why now?  Is this a sticking plaster approach to the often poor public and estabishment attitude to disabled people. Is it meant to prove we are viewed positively because I'm not fooled. Any official attitude change needs to be seen as consistent to make a real difference. Does the BBC just want to be seen as inclusive so they have trotted out a disabled person for the purpose?  Again relative one offs won't change much, and I'm not taken in by tokeism. If the aim is to use a disabled person to prove a point in favour will do nothing for the good of the disability rights movement, it could cause serious harm.

That said this isn't a rant at Jonnie Peacock, I hope this does make a positive difference and he does really well. I'm a huge Strictly fan, and a long time disability activist, I want to be cheering on both counts, time will tell whether I am.

Student police officers get insight into Mental Healthcare

Student police officers training locally get a week long  mental health  placement at a Cornish hospital, where they work with ward staff supporting patients. The scheme is  supported by the Home Treatment Team.

Its a start although I'd like to see longer placements and the scheme extended to serving officers, including senior officers who make decisions about how those with mental health needs are dealt with when they come into contact with the police. It should also become a national scheme.

In time we might then see fewer people inappropriately placed in police cells when they need treatment. This may also improve attitudes and provision for those who commit crimes where mental health is a factor, that could also improve outcomes  for victims, and reduce reoffending.

Better support for witnesses affected by mental health issues wouldn't go amiss either, having been one more than once, I found some experiences terrifying, and wondered seriously, at least once, if I would be locked up! The police officer was irritated because an anxiety disorder made me talk too fast for him to write.

I also want officers to work with potential and ex offenders affected by mental health issues and those who support them, proactively and sensitively to prevent crime.

Thats my wish list, and I'm probably asking too much of a fledgling scheme.  As a start, if this scheme increases understanding of mental health issues among officers,  and improves the police related experiences of those living with mental health conditions it will make a difference.

Story via Services in Cornwall

Justice for Connor Sparrowhawk?

Connor Sparrowhawk àaàdied in July 2014 after drowning in a bath, during an epileptic fit at Slade House which was run by Southern Health, the unit since closed. He was left  unsurpervised, and neglect was ruled to be a factor in his death. Various legal and regulatory proceedings are ongoing, so its not appropriate to comment too much. I just hope that his family's long battle will soon end, that Connor gets justice and can finally rest in peace.

Just because you can't see it, it still exists

Don't judge us, we may have conditions you can't see that cause pain exhaustion, or mental health symptoms like depression and anxiety. Only the person with the condition knows. Getting dressed or doing the dishes might take their days energy to do, after anyone they may need to rest.

Please don't judge.

Care homes not the only option

We have an aging population and because people live longer more people will need care for longer. So the answer is thousands more care home beds then, not only for the elderly, but for disabled people needing care, easy problem sorted

No, over use of care homes institionalises people, may mean they lose independance quicker, their health may suffer, and they become isolated from their communities.

What do we need? First lets not forget they are people with rights and choices. Most people if they could, would stay at home but to do that we need a responsive care service to support people at home with enough flexibility to support lifestyles of choice, rather than the fed and watered, essentials only approach many care packages are reduced to. Its not acceptable that people have to choose between eating or using the toilet, or that people don't don't ask for help for fear of being forced into homes. This fear culture of care needs to change because far from supporting people it puts them at risk.

If someone needs or chooses to go into a supported setting, it doesn't have to be a traditional care home. Group homes where less care may be available but the companionship and peer support are big advantages. Extra care living, still your own home with care on tap. If residential provision is the only option then support should be available to ensure individual don't lose the right to their own lives.

At all stages the person needing care should be in control, and if they choose should be supported to continue with their normal life. If none of the stock option suit them then a bespoke solution should be found, PAs supporting people in residential settings, 24 hour care at home, bight centres, like day centres, but where someone can sleep if they need support should be set up, the possibilities are endless. Instead of fitting people to provision, make the services that suit each person.

Being old or disabled should not mean the end of life as it was, but the same life made better because support is available in the way chosen by the individual.  Needing care doesn't mean people that stop being people, and it is never appropriate to treat them as less than the individual they are.

NHS Mental health services local survey results

My local paper  asked people for their experiences of local mental health services. I largely agree with their survey findings, which I didn't take part in.  Below I've copied  my comments on the article on their facebook page:-

I have to pay for therapy, after using all my NHS allowance, the therapy didn't help me that much, I ended up in hospital after taking an overdose, I had told my therapist I was struggling, got told to make more effort. It wasn't the CPFT, but another provider. I had waited a year for treatment when I saw a nurse for a physical reason and freaked out. That speeded it up if you can call it that. Before being on the waiting list I spent months whilst they decided whether I needed CPFT or the other provider. I got referred to CPFT 7 times including during treatment, because the theapist I saw thought my needs were too severe for her service whilst CPFT said I wasn't unwell enough to need them. Falling between the two made my situation worse. I didn't get the right care. I saw a CPN once ahe said there wasn't much wrong with me because I smiled at her. She also asked if I was anxious, as I have complex PTSD caused largely by my 'treatment' by other professionals not linked to the NHS that was a fairly safe guess! She then decided I needed only 12 sessions with the  other service and I would be much better. More than  30 NHS sessions and 4 years with low cost private therapy and I almost at the end of regular sessions.  What happened to me went on for a long time, so was never going to end quickly. I would never willingly start treatment with the NHS again. My therapist now is amazing.

Nobody cares if it costs too much

A pensioner is distressed because his care costs too much. His daughter claims he is being asked to pay £30 towards carers that he can't afford. He is so upset he plans to refuse in the hope he goes to prison so will be properly looked after.

Most people receiving social care are expected to pay towards it, but the charge must take into account income and outgoings and the income left  after certain expenditure must not be below a certain level.  Not having capital or money for a funeral is not usually a consideration. Each local authority sets their own rules within a national framework. If this is as stated and he can't afford to live, he should get advice and challenge it.

The mark of a civilised society is how they treat their weakest members, this  makes me ashamed of our country. The Conservatives have done nothing to support those in need instead they attack those who should be protected.

Facebook group supports man in need of mental health help

Really glad he got the help he needed but there is a real.need for more services available out of hours.

http://m.cornwalllive.com/man-helps-to-restore-faith-in-humanity-after-heart-warming-responses-to-post-about-mental-health/story-30487498-detail/story.html

Robin gets 4 A*s and is a carer

A welsh teen has got 4 top A level grades whilst  being a full time carer to his mum. Thats great but it doesn't change the fact that people who care for family members need more support, better access to respite and higher financial support. Carer's Allowance where carers qualify for it is around £62 per week. Thats for a minimum 35 hour week.

The right to care and support

Luke Davey has cerebral palsy and is registered blind, as a result he needs help with all aspects of daily living. He used to get that help through the Independant Living Fund which topped up his social services care package. ILF has now closed and the money passed to local authorities, but not ring fenced for those who previously had ILF. As a result Mr Davey's care package has been reduced from almost £1,700 per week to just £950 per week. He says this is both unreasonable and unlawful.

In a landmark case Mr Davey is taking Oxfordshire County Council to the Appeal Court, it will be the first time the 2014 Care Act has been used to challenge the actions of a local authority in this way. Thats the Act that was supposedly  meant to give those using care services more choice, control and rights. Mr Davey previously had this package for 23 years, and had a team of personal assistants supporting him. His needs have not decreased funding cuts have reduced his package. Cuts mean severely disabled people like Mr Davey will struggle to manage, if they do at all, and will be reduced to existing rather than living a life they choose.

In a twist disabled people were reportedly excluded from the court hearing, when staff allegedly  claimed there weren't enough staff to cope and refused to open the acessible entrance. Access was later allowed but judged poor by campaigners, whilst one risked injury.

The Government states that they want disabled people to be full participants in society, but their policies scream otherwise. If someone needs support to live, removing that support, or reducing it,  takes away their ability to choose how they live. Many disabled people have full lives, they are part of their community, taking part in events, aand may be contributing through volunteering, work.or study. They can only do this with support, support the law gives them a right to. The same support government cuts take away.

This case could have a fundamental effect on the lives and rights of disabled people. If successful it could force massive changes in practice and attitudes within support provision. It is right that disabled people would want to attend the case. To try to prevent this could be discrimination under the Equality Act 2010. That an organisation charged with upholding the law could even possibly breach it in this way is shameful. The right to defend rights through including access to justice is the most basic right  of all.

Story Source U R The Voice and Vox Political online

Can't work is not won't work

Some people on Employment & Support allowance  are sqnctioned for up to 6 months if they don't or can't take part in work related activities deemed suitable by Job Centre staff or their appointed providers. ESA is paid to those unable to work due to disability or illness with those in the work related group, WRAG, assessed as able to take part in certain activities and deemed likely to return to work within 6 months In reality its anyone who does not score 15 points in any one section of the Work Capability Assessment, regardless of how many points they get above 15 over the whole assessment. These are still often significantly disabled people.

These activities can be anything that the worker decides is appropriate, it may be work schemes, education, training or anything else judged relevant to your situation. Your benefits can be sanctioned if you do not participate.  In short people already too ill to work are punished if they do not do activities similar to those demanded of unemployed people. This on  top of changes that mean that from  earlier this year  new ESA claimants  in the WRAG now get the same amount of benefit as Jobseekers Allowance clainmants,  a cut of £30 per week.

I have long thought that the Conservative Government saw those that can't work in the same  light as those that won't. Certainly this appears to be proof that they view those with heath conditions as simply unemployed. Whilst in reality the effects of significant and/or longstanding medical conditions mean that finding and keeping work is a major challenge for many people if they are able to work at all. Forcing people to do activities they do not feel, or are not capable of, puts them at risk, both from the effects of the activity, and from the fear of what will happen if they do nor comply. 

Many thousands have already died or been seriously harmed by Conservatives welfare policies, this regime also puts people at serious risk. The government must now be held accountable for its actions and failure to keep its pledge that those unable to work would be supported.

Note Those in the Support Group of ESA receive higher benefit payments and do not have to participate in work related activity.

Mental health care needs treatment not prevention

Mental health is in the news again as its announced young people will get help to manage exam stress.Thats great, if they follow through and if its real help not a tick box exercise. I suspect sadly that it will go the way the rest of the Conservative mental health promises have, great big obvious U turns, full of nothing but excuses.

There were going to be more nurses and psychologists so that people got care quickly, they failed. More beds so that people don't end up in police cells, but they still do. Access to services earlier, great but they meant first level for those with milder conditions, there still isn't enough help for those needing more. Too many people have to wait for a crisis before they get care, if they are lucky!

There is a mental health crisis in this country that the government pretend to tackle by tinkering and making promises they don't keep. Any preventative measure is welcome but not at the expense of those needing treatment now, and not getting it because the Government don't deliver.

PIP petition please support the Labour Campaign

Please sign and share the petition to ensure disabled people get the support tbey need. The Conservatives are trying to overturn a court ruling so that they can stop 160K getting the level of PIP or personal.Independance Payment they are entitled to.

Is this social cleansing of people with downs syndrome

In Iceland very few babies are born with Downs syndrome with a high take  up of pre natal tests and almost 100% of those with a positive test having terminations. Why  is this?

Is it that the environment would present special challenges? Is care for those who live with the condition so poor that life is seen as unacceptable? Or is it socially   unacceptable so that unconcious social cleansing takes place?

I find this disturbing, whilst I wouldn't wish  for any child to be disabled. This  procedd though suggests that people with downs are not valued here. Disabled people including those with downs can have a life worth living, why here then does there seem to be such an effort for them not to exist? This article relates only to downs, though I wonder what their attitude is to other disabilities.

In the article a mother of a child with the condition says she wants her child to grow up to be part of society on her own terms, thats how it should be for every child whether disabled or not. How can it be for that child though if she is in a minority that has been actively and markedly reduced?

The perils of flying if you use a wheelchair

Lost luggage is one thing but losing your wheelchair, or other essential mobility equipment, or having it damaged can render you immobile and ruin your holiday. Nor is it a rare occurrence, I've had  a scratched and bent wheelchair and scarily my wheelchair was lost for an hour in an airport. I was aware it was lost, they kept telling me it was in different areas of the airport, only telling the truth when it reappeared. I told them I would have borrowed the chair I was sat in, I also had insurance but the whole experince was awful.

Wheelchair users need more protection, and it should be treated in the same way as any other stranded holidaymaker would be, with regard for any additional needs the customer has.

This patient is losing patience

My GP surgery is a super surgery, a group working as a single practice. Its really not that super because just the level of demand causes issues, it must be awful to work there. I've had phonecalls asking if I really need an appointment I've booked, reminders for appointments not booked, demands that I go to a site that I hate for appointments, and random texts asking if I would reccommend them.

Todays event was yet another patience sapping event. I went online to check an appointment time, only to find I had another appointment booked that I hadn't been told about, werevthey hoping I'd get bored and just turn up by chance? They have enough difficulty giving everyone appointments so why make appointments parients don't know about and are likely to go unused. I rang up to rebook it because I can't go that day. I asked why I hadn't been told, you probably would have  been beforehand, its 2 weeks away. You might be on a phone list.  Yes but it could have been wasted and why do that?  To make sure you get appointments. Do patients not get a choice now? yes you do you can choose if its convenient!  I gave up at that point. I've decided I don't need the hassle or the appointment and the complaint is already sent.

I have to ask why they make a situation that is difficult for everybody even worse and why risk wasting appointments that are often as rare as hen's teeth?

Access News at Primark

Found in a facebook group but worth a share so that people know. I've used this in Primark in different places.

If you are a disabled person who shops at Primark, they have special arrangements in place in all stores so you can go to the open end of any bank of cash desks and be served right there, rather than trying to navigate the often narrow queueing system.

You may have a short wait but it's so much easier.

Disabled people are not all the same

The BBC are starting a scheme to promote disabled actors, really good. I only hope that it isn't used as a stick by the RW media to beat us. 'They can so those that can't must be lazy scroungers'

It isn't just the BBC and not just this scheme, the paralympics was used against us, they can, we all can, and a few years ago Stephen Hawkin was used by a doctor to 'prove' we could all work.

This is inequality  in its strangest form, abled bodied people are not compared to athletes, actors or anyone else in this way. Its accepted that abledbl bodied people are diverse, but not that those with disabilities are. We are not all the same, we have different strengths.

I know of disabled who dread the paralympics because it will start the rhetoric, if you can do that you could work,  why can they do that and not work? Others who won't socialise or do the things they enjoy because they might be judged.

The right wing government and their media, including the BBC have fostered the idea that anything we can do could be transferred to the workplace, and those of us that  don't conform to this are lazy. Sickness benefit criteria says that the set tasks must be repeated  and reliably carried out, if not then the person cannot do those tasks. Media and government conveniently forget this and the damage is done, many members of the generalbpublic believe what they are told. The fact is doing something sometimes, or in a very controlled and supported environment that is adapted is very different to the reality of repeatedly doing so in the workplace. Sinilarly not everybody has the same skills and they are not all transferable

Make Ability Count

You can't do that you are disabled. Do you think you should do that? Are you allowed? Do you need to ask your carer? Should you be doing that on your own? But youre in a wheelchair! Can I speak to your carer? Are you meant to be doing that?

I've had all those and more including some very rude reactions to us doing the same things as everyone else, as have probably most disabled people. Do those that say this understand how wrong they are, and that in disrespecting, discounting, or dismissing our abilities they disrespect us and in turn society misses out on the value of what we can do. I know you will all be shocked but we do actually pay bills, cook and do housework just like anyone else but thats just the tip of the iceberg!

It takes skill to be disabled and live life, many of them the skills abled bodied people use at work. The carers that help us, many people employ them, and just like any employer that means planning rotas,  underatanding workers  rights, and our responsibilities and if someone  goes sick, finding cover quickly. Out and about isn't a doddle either if you need more than just feet. Checking access, beforehand,  planning what we will do if the access isn't accessible, making sure we have transport and assistance,  and then there is being ready to deal with the unexpected, could a wheelchair breakdown, someone walking into us, or transport failure. Thats just a day out, after a holiday, we need a holiday to recover.  There is support out there benefits, care and equipment, but getting through the maze, and applying for all that takes knowledge determination and massive effort, its no simple task.

If  then our abilities count, we are managers, health and safety experts, skilled  in logistics and problem solving, and communication, along side our interests and work skills.  Count on all that and we all gain

Nowhere to go

A disabled woman says housing won't help her because she is either too disabled or not disabled enough. On the face of it thats discrimination and if so is wrong. Housing law is complex though and the legal definition of homlessness which gives rise to a duty to house very specific.

Much is made in the article of her disability which would make finding a home more difficult. However being disabled doesn't make getting support automatic, she has to be unintentionally homeless.

This article poses more questions that it answers. Why are the LA, not meeting their duty, or not accepting they have one? If they are sending her to providers who can't assist her, then should they not liase to help her find a solution? Why are they not working with Social Services to support her more? If they have offered her money and that isn't enough are they helping her find somewhere where that is enough?

The LA may have acted correctly and done all it can, it may not. None of that changes the fact that there needs to be more accessible housing, and more support to locate it. Even if you can buy it can take years to find a suitable property. Even getting an agent to understand what suitable for adaption means is a challenge! If you have a disability, its never as easy as find a property and move in.