Your Letters - November 2009

Your views

View of the bay

In October 2008 I ruptured the Achilles’ tendon in my right heel. I was in plaster for two months, severely restrictly my mobility: in fact for the first six weeks I couldn’t walk without crutches.

Public transport isn’t very good in my village and as taxi fares can be prohibitively expensive, I had to rely on the goodwill of friends, family and colleagues to get around.

During my recovery period, I couldn’t gain any concession or assistance from our local authority in terms of relaxing parking restrictions, because of the rigid criteria relating to the issue of Blue Badges.

I know my difficulties were expected to be temporary but this didn’t make them less real while they lasted.

I now learn that recommendations have been put forward that the restrictions should be relaxed to include those with a temporary disability, but the relaxation will only help those whose disability is expected to last 12 months or more (as against the current three years). It won’t help people who’ve been in the situation I was in.

There must by now be a wealth of knowledge on recovery times relating to mobility problems following surgical procedures: why can’t the new Blue Badge legislation include short-term provision based on what a patient’s consultant recommends? I think there needs to be some effective lobbying on this.
John Shippey, Haddenham, Cambs

May I add an additional thought to the one made in the October 2009 issue of Disability Now by Malcom Hosie (“Disabled bay users can also offend”)?

Mr Hosie referred to disabled badge holders who sit in their cars while their able-bodied passengers go shopping. I’m concerned that disabled drivers should be able to sit in their cars while their disabled passengers go shopping.

I’m 33 percent disabled and often sit in my car in a disabled bay while my wife, also a Blue Badge holder, entitled to use disabled bays in her own right, does the shopping. We certainly need the use of disabled bays and the closer they are to our destination, the better.

I’m aware, though, that because neither I nor my wife looks disabled, people might think we’re abusing a bay when I sit there. This raises the question in Mr Hosie’s letter: how does he know if a passenger is able-bodied?

It can be tricky to know if someone’s disabled or not and Baywatch should take care not to leap to conclusions about people on the basis of what they look like.
J G Dowse, Lincolnshire

Is your Baywatch campaign monitoring areas other than supermarkets, such as sports centres? At Leeds Council’s South Leeds stadium and pool tonight there were 14 cars in disabled bays.

Only three were displaying Blue Badges. This is always the case, and there’s a large, free car park not more than two minutes’ walk away.
P J Robinson, by email

Misinterpretation lets down carers

I thought Andy Rickell’s criticism of Tom Shakespeare in the article “A model of equality” (Disability Now, October 2009) was badly done and in poor spirit.

I read Tom’s book when it first came out and it didn’t say the social model was wrong. It said the current interpretation was too restrictive, needed developing, created oppositions that weren’t there and resulted in an unhelpfully limited debate.

I’ve always thought the social model championed equality, rights and dignity. Some campaigners have over-simplified that model for short-term gains.

They’ve let it be used to bash medical staff and organisations. That’s made it very easy for medical services to be undermined.

Too many spokespeople confuse the medical model and medical services. I care for my son, and want him to be treated with dignity and respect, whether he’s receiving a medical service or booking a holiday. I want him to use general medical services and have access to specialised services. There’s no contradiction in this.

I’m delighted that a more intelligent line is at last being taken: I just hope it isn’t too late. The Government’s green paper on the Future of Care isn’t based on a social model and doesn’t talk about the quality and well-being of people needing care: it’s more functional and limited. It talks about “personalisation” and taking away benefits that give people a few day-to-day choices. That’s depressingly medical and people like Andy should take their share of responsibility. He always talks about marginalising the rights of people who rely on carers, rather than giving them equality. Can you ask him to up his game, so that we can get a better debate?
Helen Daly, Carer

Uncooperative banking

I’ve belonged to the Co-Operative Bank for some years, managing my finances online. When the card reader was introduced (see “Webwatch”, Disability Now, October 2009), I found neither the web demo nor the printed instructions to be clear and readable. As a result, the system blocked my pin and even new cards and pins and numerous phone calls haven’t resolved the situation. Promises by phone staff have not been kept, and line managers have been unavailable.

All this occurred just as I was going on holiday. Unable to access my own cash I’ve maxed out my credit card, been charged interest on a Co-Op card bill I didn’t receive and on another card where I’d initiated the payment in good time. I’ve been told I’ll be phoned back on this and haven’t been. I’m no longer able to spend and access my money and I’ve lost control of my finances.

In addition, the bank charges me a fee for administering my current account, which seems grossly unfair. This bank has also stopped paying £10 for each mistake it makes, in spite of the contract I signed up to.

I don’t have a local branch near to me that I can visit to resolve this, so today I visited a local Barclays with a view to switching my account. I questioned them on card readers and was told that even when making a transaction on bank premises, it’s necessary to take one’s card reader. No mention was made of the machine mentioned in your article, which would resolve my problems.
Ian Jacobs, Desborough, Northants

CORRECTION: Dr Juliet Williams, the Liberal Democrat prospective parliamentary candidate for Brighton Kemptown, has asked us to point out a misunderstanding that arose over the nature of her disability in our article on political candidates with disabilities (“In it to win it”, Disability Now, October 2009). As the article describes, she has an over-use injury to her hand that has left residual disability in the form of reduced manual dexterity. It is specifically the task of delivering literature on consecutive days that she needs to avoid.