People

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 14° London Hi 15°C / Lo 8°C

The underclass: Talented but disabled

There are countless people like the ones on these pages: talented but disabled. And they still face bureaucratic barriers in their lives. Nina Lakhani reports

Dan Pepper, 20, from Stockport, is an elite swimmer with a learning disability.

Dan Pepper, 20, from Stockport, is an elite swimmer with a learning disability.

Thousands of disabled people across the UK are forced to rely on charities for basic care, equipment and vital information because of gaps in social services, according to new research by Shelter and Capability Scotland. Their report, Fit for Purpose, to be published this summer, will expose the constant battle disabled people face as they try to adapt their homes or move into more suitable housing. A lack of practical advice, long waiting lists and shortfalls in funding are common because of a huge gap between government policy and practice on the ground, the authors claim.

The findings add to pressure on the Government and health authorities after a scathing report into the care received by six people with learning disabilities who subsequently died. Their cases were described as an "indictment of our society" by the health and social care ombudsmen.

New research highlights problems common across the UK, where charities frequently fill gaps left by a shortage of suitable housing and discrimination in the job market. Many disabled people are still reliant on social services to decide what they need.

Parents of severely disabled children in some parts of the country rely on charities for basics such as incontinence pads and wheelchairs. A recent survey by the charity Livability found a lack of classroom services prevented one in five young adults from pursuing higher education.

The findings come only days before a report by the Joint Select Committee on Human Rights, which looks at the Government's failure to ratify the UN Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. The Government says it will ratify the treaty this year but insists it must opt out of several unworkable areas. The Select Committee strongly criticised ministers recently for the delay and for failing properly to consult disabled people about their decision.

Alice Maynard, chair of Scope, said: "The Government's decision to opt out of certain areas means it is essentially ring-fencing parts of life which disabled people can and cannot go into. This reinforces the view that disabled people are not as equal as others and that it's OK for other people to decide where they can and cannot be seen."

The workplace

Sandi Wassmer, 46, from London, runs a web design agency. She is registered blind.

"The obstacles I face are nothing to do with my visual impairment. Other people's attitudes and their ignorance are my biggest problem. Most people still don't get it. They don't know how to engage with people like me because they're scared and they're ignorant, so they assume I'm not capable. For me, these attitudes present in different ways. It can be a well-meaning person in a Tube station who offers to help me in a really loud and slow voice as if I were stupid. In business, because my disability isn't obvious, I tend not to tell anyone because I know how most people who don't know my work will react. I've lost potential clients because they immediately assume a blind person can't run a successful design agency. Disability is seen as a flaw or limitation."

Sport

Dan Pepper, 20, from Stockport, is an elite swimmer with a learning disability.

The International Paralympics Committee banned all athletes with a learning disability from competing at the Paralympics after the Spanish basketball team cheated at the Sydney Games. In the run-up to 2012, it means that children are excluded from government initiatives to find new talent. And Dan could miss out on representing his country at the very top level.

"Sport has always been my thing. I went to a mainstream school and while my friends would beat me in the classroom, I could outrun and outswim them all. I swam well under the qualifying time for Athens but in the end we weren't even allowed to participate in an exhibition event. It was so disheartening: one day I was telling my school friends I was going to the Olympics, the next day it was all off. We were promised the ban would be overturned for Beijing, and there are only so many times you can brush off the disappointment and keep getting back in the pool. It's hard to train nine times a week when there isn't anything to aim for. The swimming pool is where I'm the best and I just want the chance to prove that at 2012."

Social life/public transport

Marta Hancock, 40, from Derby, has used a wheelchair for 30 years.

"I travelled down to London last week to attend the premiere of The Boat That Rocked. The film was great but the journey and overnight stay were a nightmare. There is no lift at Derby station. I couldn't get to my wheelchair space on the train because there was luggage in the way. The toilets on trains are too small. There is no kerb at the taxi rank at St Pancras station, which makes it much harder to get a wheelchair into a taxi. In the hotel, there were no hand rails around the toilet and the hoist didn't fit in the bathroom so I had to use a bed pan. The bed was screwed to the floor so the hoist wouldn't fit under that either, and this was advertised as a wheelchair-accessible hotel. It's not easy having a social life when you're in a wheelchair."

Social care and equipment

Leah Cutting, 18, from Ipswich, has cerebral palsy. Alison Cutting, her mother, describes the battles the family faces to get essential care and equipment.

"Most of the services Leah uses will stop when she turns 19. Leah loves school and the social life that goes with that, but after one more year there, she is too disabled to participate in any of the local courses and placements that social services provide. When she finally gets a personalised budget we will have more options, but it's possible that my husband will have to take early retirement if we can't find anywhere suitable. Respite care from Scope has allowed us to be a normal family for our other two children. But according to her social worker, the only adult option in our area is a care home for the elderly, with no social activities – no way. We've relied a lot on charities over the years for equipment such as communication aids, seating and money for holidays. It took us 18 months to convince social services that Leah had outgrown her wheelchair."

Housing

Jeffrey Miller, 48, from Bishop's Stortford, has multiple sclerosis. His life is restricted to the downstairs part of his house.

"My brother and I installed all the hand rails in the house and adapted the bathroom ourselves as it was going to cost us more if I paid what the council wanted me to contribute. My mobility has got much worse and there's no way I can get upstairs any more. This means I rely on my wife to help me have a strip wash every day because the bathroom is upstairs. A stair lift would cost us £10,000. So even though we'd like to stay in this house, the Papworth Trust has helped us to get on to a couple of housing lists as I need access to the shower. It's been a year already and I've no idea how long it will take."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

(no subject) - [info]kodak321 - Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 01:52 am (UTC)
Re: Please!
[info]herr_natural wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 08:29 am (UTC)
Wow, what a response, the milk of human kindness flows - not. Two points: How does such an atittude help with the present situation. And secondly, people become disabled, not only by birth.
Slf-serving do-gooders are part of the problem
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 07:52 am (UTC)
By creating an illusion of adequate services to met extraordinary needs, behind which misgovernment can hide.
What people and especially children, need, is not charity but the legal rights denied by mutilation (by Harperson and co,)of ECHR as a characteristically mutilated/subverted HR Act (that gives human rights to violent criminals and illegal immigrants only), refusal to ratify protocol 12 and persistent failure to implement fraudulently ratified UNCRC - all because we are ruled and judged by jolly good chaps and therefore don't need the protection from such jolly good chaps that is enjoyed by other EU citizens
Inaccessible Hotel
[info]tourismforalluk wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 10:05 am (UTC)
I was sorry to read about the difficulty quoted by Marta Hancock from Derby about her experience in London. Marta said: 'In the hotel, there were no hand rails around the toilet and the hoist didn't fit in the bathroom so I had to use a bed pan. The bed was screwed to the floor so the hoist wouldn't fit under that either, and this was advertised as a wheelchair-accessible hotel'.

I would dearly love to know which hotel she had difficulty with as there is now some reliable information about accessible hotels in London, which have been checked for their accessibility.

This can be found on the VisitLondon website and also a link through to this from our own site www.tourismforall.org.uk. Marta if you read this please do contact us through our website and we will follow up!
POLITICAL ADVANTAGE
[info]lustyglaze wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 12:52 pm (UTC)
Cronyblatcher, you are correct, the rights of disabled people should be enshrined in law, and they should not have to depend on charity to have their needs met. I worked for a charity in this field many years ago, and the argument was the same then - unfortunately people with disabilities do not make good political capital - politicians have less to gain from championing their cause for that reason, so people with disabilities have a much smaller political voice, and are drowned out by more interesting or more acute causes. There is institutional discrimination against wheelchair users - in our area they must wait twice as long for hospital transport because suitable vehicles are not ringfenced for their use, or agree to the indignity of travelling on a stretcher, or pay for a specially adapted taxi for at least twice the fare of an ordinary one. We have applied for funding to build a shower room, but this will take at least a year to process - in the meantime my husband is unable to bathe or shower. If we go ahead with our own adaptation (by borrowing money that we hope will be reimbursed by the council once our application is approved) our application will be thrown out and we will be disqualified from the grant making process. We are reasonable people who are doing our best to understand and adapt to our much changed circumstances, and work with the system as best we can, but it is I am afraid demoralising and dehumanising, to have it demonstrated over and over again that the needs of wheelchair users are regarded as less important than the needs of other people, and that my husband is forced to accept a lower standard of care and service, despite his health needs being greater.
No easy answer
[info]londoner_2009 wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 01:34 pm (UTC)
This is quite a simplistic view of a complicated issue. I do not doubt that poor practice exists but I think we need to examine what our expectations are for what the state should provide, and at what cost.

What would people consider to be an acceptable timescale for home adaptations?
What amount of funding should the state provide in terms of adapting someone's home, regardless of tenure or individual income?
What should be the allowance for adaptations which are not wholly necessary to meet a need but desired by the person for aesthetics / preference etc?
What should the state do in terms of providing social housing? And at what cost?

The answer, as I see it, is to have disabled people in accountable positions deciding on policy and funding for services to meet the needs of disabled people. The word accountable is key.
Re: No easy answer
[info]jillox wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 06:11 pm (UTC)
'No easy answer, my a..e! Cop out more like! Your 'answer' is the simplistic one, the rest of your comment is exactly why PEOPLE with impairments are continually and shamefuly discriminated against. Petty little problems are piled up ever higher in order to 'opt out' of doing anything and as for accountability, do me a favour! (I'm a Londoner too). Have you ever, as a person with an impairment, tried to get an interview, let alone a job? Have you noticed how the television programes/dramas are stuffed to the gills with 'minorities' (ethnics and gays) but rarely people with impairments? Count how many people with impairments are in commercials? (It won't take you long). If we aren't seen, we don't exist, get it? How's that for simplicity??
Re: No easy answer
[info]londoner_2009 wrote:
Monday, 30 March 2009 at 11:58 am (UTC)
I didn't say if I have an impairment or not.

I don't think it's a case of 'if we aren't seen, we don't exist'; many impairments are not visible. You can't look at someone on TV / in the street and deduce they have MS, chronic fatigue syndrome, diabetes, or depression for example

Disabled people are in accountable jobs; disabled people should decide policy for disabled people.

The other issues aren't petty points; they are issues needing full debate or there is no new policy.

Jillox - What do you suggest?
What's in a name?
[info]jillox wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 05:59 pm (UTC)
Why 'disabled'? The very word is insulting and incorrect. What else is there? Oh yes, 'invalid', don't even go there! The writer of this article misses the point, it isn't only bureaucratic barriers, it is attitudes. A lot of the general public are way ahead of the politicians, media and advertisers in treating PEOPLE with physical impairments fairly but the power and control is not in the hands of the public. The fact that this incompetent government have deliberately refused to ratify the UN Treaty and chooses to opt out on specifics that would help eleven million people in this country, shows them to be the hypocrites they really are. An example of a 3rd class life: I found it almost impossible as a wheelchair user to wholly access a shop, because of piles of boxes strewn around the aisles. Finally, I was assisted by an elderly lady, who physically moved some of the boxes. When I mentioned this to one of the staff she said they were unpacking stock and it wasn't always like this. She then suggested that It would be better that I didn't come into the shop on a Wednesday, (stock day)!! The fact it was a Thursday must have passed her by. Can you imagine making such a suggestion to a black or gay person? Yeah right!
Try again
[info]f57j wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 09:33 pm (UTC)
I recall speaking to a woman at the entrance to public toilets somewhere on Anglesey. She was in a wheelchair and having real trouble negotiating herself and her wheelchair through the - wait for it! - disabled entrance, supposedly designed to be wider for those in wheelchairs.

Eventually she managed it but it was ridiculous and she had to admit that time and time again she was coming up against badly designed wheelchair entrances (pun intended just incase the woman is reading this - her sense of the ridiculous had been finely tuned). It should be that those who need and use these facilities are consulted and listened to (properly) at every stage of development - better still give the jobs to them so they can teach the rest of us sillies how to get it right.

As for all the really good contributions above I think the swimmer's words sum it all up - "there are only so many times you can brush off the disappointment and keep getting back in the pool". And, yes, I am aiming that specifically at the rest of us who are, lets face it, disappointing when it comes to understanding anything that requires a little imaginative effort beyond our own little comfortable lives.
Apologies!
[info]kodak321 wrote:
Sunday, 29 March 2009 at 10:25 pm (UTC)
I can't see the problem. If your screwed-up, blame the Gov, parents or bad luck. Shut up and get on with it....just don't winge...it's tiresome. Benefits galore for the disabled, plenty with wealthy parents....

Enjoy
Re: Apologies!
[info]jillox wrote:
Monday, 30 March 2009 at 10:07 am (UTC)
Kodak321, so you 'can't see the problem'? You'd make a lousy camera then! Your attitude says it all. You complain (we whinge) that PEOPLE with impairments are 'screwed-up', whinge or have to blame somebody! See, one rule for you and your miserable bone-headed ilk and another for us. 'Benefits galore for THE disabled' eh? How do you know, made a study of eleven million people's finances then, have you? 'Plenty with wealthy parents'? Is it a criteria then that the majority of people with impairments must be born to rich maters & paters? Are you aware that anger is very stressful and that stress often leads to debilitating illnesses? Thought I'd mention it, you never know, you too could join the eleven million whingers, screwed up blamers one day. Enjoy!

Most popular

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date