to just not understand this attitude?

[Livinginaparalleluniverse]

Unfortunately my sister is in a wheelchair, the NHS provided wheelchair is functional, but too heavy for her to manovere by herself, and therefore she requires someone to go with her if she wants to go out anywhere.

The wheelchair she can use by herself is £1,000. NHS say they won't provide as they've done their bit and provided a wheelchair. My wealthy mother who for her £1k is a drop in the ocean, has spent 18mths battling the NHS to get this chair. My sister has asked my mum if any chance she could provide the chair, being very dependent is affecting my sister psychologically. My mum's attitude is the NHS should be providing the chair and therefore she refuses to purchase chair on principle not monetary.

Yes in an ideal world the NHS would have the funds to provide the best piece of equipment available, but we don't and that's the way it is.

My friend's son has a severe speech impediment and is waiting for speech and language therapy, but in their area due to staff shortage there is significant delay beyond the recommended 8 weeks. Again very wealthy, funds not the issue.

When I recommended going private, they were horrifed at having to, as why should they spend their money on something that the state should (and incidentally do provide just not in timely fashion)?

I just don't understand this attitude at all.

If you agree with them, please explain.

If you agree with me, thank you.

We dont know how old the child mentioned in the OP is so we have no idea what the window for opportunity is. I have not heard of the 'recommended 8 weeks'. I must ask the SALTS I work with tomorrow about it.
Its unlikely she knows much about the issue at all if she is calling it a speech impediment.
Its like one of those OPs where the poster knows all about the financial situation of a benefits claiment and what they spend their money on.
In fact there is a lot wrong with the OP. 'the NHS has done their bit' no they havent. Not if they have given the sister a chair she cant use. How is that 'doing their bit'

Anyway this isnt all about the NHS is it? Not unless people think disablity is all about the Medical Model. Health care is a small part of the issue, particularly if the sister is not ill. You can be disabled without being ill.

I wonder why the sister hasnt offered to pitch in with a few quid? I mean she is family isnt she? I wouldnt expect her to personally but I am astounded that hasnt come up yet. What with everyone being so keen on families chipping in for their unfortunatly disabled members.

Its like the DDA never happened on MN sometimes.

Perhaps I should ask the inlaws to chip in for dd. Actually, maybe not because they suggested all disabled people should be skipping off to Dignitas.

Good point mrsdevere - why isn't the op buying it?

Can OP afford to chip in? Haven't read all posts but she's not necessarily as comfortably off as their mum

the NHS specs comparison is rather bewildering - as the NHS specs difference is/was purely cosmetic, not providing glasses that could only be worn in the house, and would be ineffective out of the house, unlike wheelchairs.

I interpreted the 8 weeks not as being a window of opportunity, but as an aspiration in terms of waiting list times. Have never ever heard of an 8 week window of opportunity for SALT.

Yeah, the NHS only provide one mobility device I was told by the OT who provided me with my granny walker. And wheelchairs is a very sticky subject, often they provide the wrong kind and take a very long time doing so.

'There is significant delay beyond the recommended 8 weeks' -- this is the window mentioned. You can choose to question absolutely everything the OP says about the child and his problems and his parents if you like of course.

I would say that in general, there really are some speech delays and other developmental delays that unless treated in a timely fashion, become harder to address and can have the effect of holding back other areas of development while you wait.

I didn't foresee how the idea of family members supporting each other financially when it is obvious that what the health services can provide will fall far short of what is needed could have prompted the tone of he comments related to the idea of chipping in. It has been an eye opener. Someone upthread posted thoughts on the role of family and whether our idea of what it is and what it's for has been somehow lost and I think I agree.

I absolutely support the NHS and the idea of free at point of service healthcare for all, and the idea of welfare in general for those who need it, and it is a disgrace that this health service should be limping along and possibly on the verge of being parcelled up and sold off. I have lived in the US where the dog eat dog attitude is considered the crowning glory of the nation, and I wouldn't like to be seriously ill there, or to have a chronic condition of any kind. But I still see a role for family to buy services or necessary items when the NHS won't. I see it as a matter of practicality over principle. If a family member was in need I would throw principle under the bus, not the relative.

These people are content to see their presumed "loved ones" suffer for their own principles. I'm glad they are not my relatives.

Red

Here they won't give outdoor power chair . They are only concerned with ability for indoors

If you can propel indoors you don't qualify at all

These people who are content to force family member to provide statutory services for people in need. I am glad they dont run the country.

Oh wait.....

what a nasty post EssentialFattyAcid and incredibly judgy

And OhDoAdmitMrsDeVere I agree there is something wrong with the OP, I have a feeling this thread is not all it seems.

There is no 8 week window.

How can there be?

How old is the child? What is the nature of his speech problem? When was it identified? What is the suggested treatment?

Where is the OP?

I really want to know more about this unsuitable wheelchair.
How can it be worse than a 1k one? Or in other words how can a 1k one be so much better?

If the OP is skint perhaps she could arrange some sort of charity drive to raise the money to buy the chair.

Seems odd to let her sister suffer on a point of principal i.e. her mum should buy the chair.

So if your child broke their arm and he NHS decided randomly that it couldn't afford to treat you would just cough up? Or woukd you be livid that they weren't covering basic care. Or the glasses case - if they provided glasses but they didn't have any arms (that's e deluxe model and cost a grand- nhs can't afford them) but your chid can see providing someone holds the glasses to their eyes the whole time. Would that be acceptable or would you be kicking off at them not having their needs met?

There are very few people who can just afford to find a grand, then another grand, then another then another. Which is what happens if you decide you'll just pay for basic services.

In ds1's talker case we were lucky that we were able to get school training as part of it's purchase. But I have taken on responsibility for it and for adding words etc to it - which is fine - but had it been bought through the LEA that woukd have been the school SALT's responsibility. It doesn't take me much time and doesn't cost much. It's more complicated with wheelchairs etc where adjustments etc are needed - who funds those?

What chair does your sister have and what does she need. What is get disability as this can influence chair choice I may be able to point op sister in the right direction for help And how she can also appeal to get a better chair there are some choice phases to use

I have very grave doubts about this thread.
It seems designed to start a debate about the burden placed by disabled people on the state and how they are being let down by their families.

Rather than being let down by the state.

Now why would someone want to do that?

good question,
I think it smells very fishy

oh and the op has only ever done this one thread

YANBU. also loads of people use the NHS without thinking about the cost depleting the limited pot of money for people who need it.

i was in A&E having been sent there by the walk in clinic. a man was there about his knee pain and wanted some free paracetamol. the receptionist was great & asked him about 10 times 'Have you had an accident?' 'No' 'how long has your leg been hurting?' '6 months' 'Well this is Accident and Emergency and you have not had an accident and 6 months is not an emergency. you can buy paracetamol for 35p at the chemist accross the road....' and round again they went. he just wanted it for free. FFS sake to save himself 35p he wanted to see an A&E doctor...

I was diagnosed with gestational diabetes during my last pregnancy in the US. At the time, I was enrolled in the state's 'free medical service'. My mw told me I had to get a blood sugar monitor and explained all about diet, exercise, etc., that DD4 would be delivered on her due date and no later no matter how this came about. She told me how to do the finger pricking, use the blood sugar monitor, told me the range of values that were healthy and what to do if values came up outside of this range, etc.

Off I went to get the monitor and all the supplies, only to be told that this wasn't covered by the 'free medical service'. So my choice was to wing it as far as blood testing went, and possibly end up injecting insulin (which would not have been covered either I found out, and that option would also have required a monitor) -- or to cough up the initial $150 and take care of my health, and follow that with expensive extra testing strips as needed at intervals. We went without a lot that summer in order to afford the necessary monitor and its essential accessories. The reason I was enrolled in the state medical scheme in the first place was that we couldn't afford private healthcare or private health insurance (exH was self employed) and the $300 we eventually spent was $300 we didn't have to spare.

Wrt this particular case, the OP's mother is wealthy enough that £1000 is a drop in the ocean and even though she hasn't come back to the thread we can't really assume the OP is talking through her rear end here. This mother could probably afford the adjustments and the ongoing maintenance.

The NHS funds things like insulin pumps. I think it should only fund basic injection kits and insulin pumps should be paid for by patients. (of course I don't - there are some people for whom insulin pumps massively improve their quality of life - but some of this thread would seem to think that only the bare minimum shoukd be provided, never mind if it don't work well or decreases quality of life - which conditions do we apply this argument to?)

Doesn't. Not don't. Am typing and talking.

If anything, I think this thread could go in relationships, where the subjects of mothers or mothers in law and how they make people want to rip their hair out and bash their heads against solid surfaces are frequently discussed.

I don't think the OP showed anything but care and concern for her sister and has acknowledged that the NHS has already provided a chair but that it is not very useful. She just wants someone, anyone, to provide a chair that will enable her sister to stop being a prisoner in her own house and can't understand how her own mother can't see the distress the imprisonment is causing her daughter.

I think there are people here who are a bit paranoid where the NHS and issues surrounding the needs of disabled individuals are concerned. Nowhere did anyone suggest that the OP's sister even hint that her sister is a burden on the state or the taxpayer or that the NHS had let her down or that families in general should take care of their own. She reasonably asked if her own mother is a heartless cow but she was too polite to call her that.

Paracematmol = suitable wheelchair

'I have very grave doubts about this thread.
It seems designed to start a debate about the burden placed by disabled people on the state and how they are being let down by their families.

Rather than being let down by the state.

Now why would someone want to do that?'

Ummm, because the constant attacks and drip feed in the media is leading people to believe disabled people are burdens, useless eaters and if you have the gall to produce a disabled child then you should pay for everything for ever.
Getting ready to pull the NHS arent they.