Skip to content.

Colour
  • Colour option 1
  • Colour option 2
  • Colour option 3

Document Actions

Ask the experts

Questions and Answers

Q I am a 47-year-old with progressive MS and have a problem getting into bed. Once I am lying down I need a small adjustment of position to get comfortable: towards the centre of the bed or up the bed but never more than a few inches and always involving two carers. I have been in hospital many times and have received care at home for four years. During that time, nobody has ever expressed concern about moving me but the management is now reprimanding all its carers for not using slide sheets. I feel this is unfair. Whenever we have tried to use a slide sheet in the past it has proved unsuccessful. It makes me feel unsafe; it involves undignified rolling back and forth; my carers feel it is harder for them; it takes longer; and I still need adjusting when the sheet is removed. In short, slide sheets cause more problems than they solve, yet the management insists on their use and seems unconcerned about my objections. Let me emphasise that I would never expect my carers to do anything that might put them at risk or that they might feel uncomfortable with. I would very much appreciate your input on this matter. Do you think, as I do, that the council is failing to use its common sense?
Name supplied, via email

Douglas Joy: Health and safety matters in this context are largely governed by the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 but manual lifting and handling in the workplace is governed by the Manual Handling Operations Regulations 1992, which requires employers to assess the manual handling operations that need to be carried out in the workplace and then put in place appropriate steps to reduce the risk of injury. Your local Social Services Department is probably trying, perhaps overzealously, to comply with this legislation in introducing the rule regarding slide sheets, as well as attempting to fulfill its general duty to its employees to provide a safe working environment. Policies on things such as manual lifting in the workplace can constitute a breach of a person's human rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 (as happened in the case of R v East Sussex County Council ex parte A, B, X and Y [2003]) but usually only where applying the relevant general rule seriously infringes disabled people's ability to live their lives. The Court in R v East Sussex County Council also stated that local authorities must strike a balance between the human rights of disabled people and the rights of their employees and carers to a safe working environment. It is therefore unlikely that the local authority's policy in this case can be challenged on legal grounds.

Q Are there any devices that can be fitted to a car in cases where the driver suffers with impaired consciousness? I suffer with mild epilepsy and although the seizures are extremly brief, they are still active. I was wondering whether you had something that may be suitable for someone with a momentary loss of consciousness.
Paul Eyres, by email

Ed Passant: There are detailed medical rules relating to epilepsy and driving, the core of which stipulate that you must have been free from a seizure (with or without medication) for at least a year before you can apply, or re-apply, for a driving licence. If your seizures are still active while you are awake, this would appear to indicate that you would not be eligible to drive under current rules.

In terms of technological advances, there have been developments as a result of research into tiredness at the wheel. One system now marketed to fleet operators uses a range of sensors to detect when a driver’s eyes have closed for a period longer than a blink. This event, described as a “micro sleep”, sets off an audible alarm designed to wake the driver up immediately, but this is a long way from innovations designed to take over if you were incapacitated and I am not aware of any currently available devices that would really suit your needs at the moment.

Q I am a wheelchair-user and would like to travel to Florida next year. Is there any airline that can take me on board in my own Wheelchair? I am unable to be in any other position apart from the one my wheelchair is moulded to.
Emily Willis

Andy Wright: Unfortunately no airline will allow wheelchair users to remain in their chair while on board. This is more to do with passenger security and health and safety regulations rather than disability compliance. As far as the moulded seat is concerned, a number of airlines will provide certain types of moulded seat that can be used on board, although moulded seats are a very personalised and tailored item and this solution does not suit all. Some moulded seats can actually be removed from the wheelchair and some airlines will consider allowing these to be placed on the airline seat, which is another possibility. Naturally, it still very much depends on the type of moulded seat required and whether passengers can benefit from a moulded seat other than their own.

Answering questions on Relationships is Simon Parritt, a counselling psychologist who has studied psychosexual therapy. Simon was the only disabled director of the former Association to Aid the Sexual and Personal Relationships of People with a Disability (SPOD). We have two Legal experts on our panel. Eleanor Williams is an employment lawyer specialising in discrimination at Darwin Gray solicitors. Disabled herself, Eleanor lectures widely and holds a number of advisory positions. Douglas Joy is the senior solicitor at the Disability Law Service and is blind. He started working in community care and mental health law in 2002. Other Benefits and Debt questions are answered by Gary Martin, who is welfare benefits supervisor at Walthamstow Citizens Advice Bureau. Our Equipment guru is John Mandrak, who is blind and has worked for nearly 25 years as a disability journalist and consultant. He is an advisor on the Disabled Living Foundation’s helpline. Answering questions on Travel is Andy Wright, who is disabled and is managing director of Accessible Travel, a specialist tour operator providing holidays for people with mobility impairments. Our Finance expert is David Clarke, who is blind, has spent 14 years in banking and has worked for three leading financial service providers. He is now a senior partner with Clydesdale Bank. Kate Sheehan answers your questions on Property. She is an independent occupational therapist with 20 years’ experience and a passionate interest in housing. Motoring questions are dealt with by Ed Passant, chief executive of the Forum of Mobility Centres, the umbrella body for 17 independent organisations which provide driver and passenger assessment for disabled people.

Responseto: 47-year-old with progressive MS

Posted by David Stephens at 05 Jan 10 22:03
I am new to Disability Now and have just read "Q I am a 47-year-old with progressive MS and have a problem getting into bed".

In response to Douglas Joy's answer.

While Health & Safety at Work legislation places a general duty on employers to minimise risk it does not require the employer to eliminate it.

On the other hand the 1990 NHS & Community Care Act imposes a duty owed to the disabled person to assess their (individual) needs.

In the High Court judgement A. B v. East Sussex County Council CO/4843/2001. 18th Feb 2003.
Mumby J states:

128. C: Assessing reasonable practicability:
In assessing reasonable practicability the approach is as Follows:

a) the possible methods of avoiding or minimising the risk must be considered (in practice the only alternative to manual lifting in a case such as this is likely to be a hoist);

b) the context -- the frequency and duration of the manoeuvres - must be considered: the assessment must be based on the pattern of lifting over a period (typically a day), not on an individual lift basis -- a particular lift might be done manually if done only once a day but not if required frequently during the day;

c) the risks to the employee in question associated with each of the possible methods must be assessed: there must be an analysis of (1) the likelihood of any injury to the employee, and (2) the severity of any injury to the employee;

d) the impact upon the disabled person, physical, emotional, psychological or social, of each of the possible methods of avoiding manual lifting must be examined:


iii) The assessment must be focussed on the particular circumstances of the individual case. Just as context is everything, so the individual assessment is all. Thus, for example:

a) the assessment must take into account the particular disabled person's personal physical and mental characteristics, be 'user focussed' and 'user led' and should be part of the wider care planning process for that particular individual;

b) there must be an assessment of the particular disabled person's autonomy interests;

c) the assessment must be based on the particular workers involved (not workers in the abstract);

d) the assessment must be based on the pattern of lifting in the particular case.

Not only is the council failing to see common sense as the 47year old with MS suggests, the cuncil has also failed to carry out a proper assessment of this persons needs in accordance with the 1990 Care Act.

The council also has not taken account of the 'Framework of Principles' or the 'Assessmen tool' set out by Mumby J in R v East Sussex CC. Or take account of the disabled person's wishes, feelings and preferences. Mumby J s132.

The council has by having a general approach to ‘moving and handling’ failed to assess the individual care workers needs and abilities. The use of glide/slide sheets in some circumstances involve more moving and handling not less, thus increasing the risk.

While Douglas Joy is correct that the right of the disbled person cannot trump the right of care worker (Mumby J. While I am not a solicitor I believe there is a case to answer.

Mumby J also ruled that: Thus it is simply not reasonably practicable for ESCC to avoid the need for their employees to undertake manual handling of A and B altogether.

A lifting policy is most unlikely to be lawful which either on its face or in its application: Imposes a blanket proscription of all manual lifting,