GOVT to cut mobility for people in residential care

[KickButtowski]

The govt plans to scrap DLA mobility for people living in residential care, so thousands of peole are going to find themselves effectively confinded to their care home as they can no longer afford scooters, electric wheelchairs, cars etc.

Please help raise awareness by forwarding this to anyone you know.

In addition a campaign has been started, by writing to Iain Duncan Smith directly. Sample letter is as follows:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

The Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP
Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

Department of Work and Pensions
Caxton House
Tothill Street
London
SW1H 9DA

Dear Secretary of State,

I am deeply concerned at the government?s refusal to accept that the removal of the mobility component of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) for people in residential care contradicts its stated goal to protect the independence of disabled people. The decision has been based on assumption of ?double funding?, which is simply wrong.

The ?Don?t limit mobility? report, produced by 27 charities and organisations, shows that the plans will have a huge impact on people who currently rely on this benefit to be able to access their local communities. Removing the mobility component of DLA will reduce equal opportunities and restrict participation in family, social and cultural life for almost 80,000 disabled people living in residential care.

If this benefit is removed, how people be able to afford specialist equipment, vehicles and transport to enable them to leave their housing as and when they wish, like all other able-bodied people?

While I understand the need to reduce the deficit, the government has promised cuts that are fair and proportionate, and this is anything but that. Evidence has shown that there is no ?double funding?. If the government continues to use this as justification for cutting DLA then it must produce evidence to prove that ?double funding? exists.

I urge you to consider the recommendations laid out in ?Don?t limit mobility? and protect the mobility component of DLA for people in residential care.

Yours sincerely,

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Even if only one person does this, it is another voie added to the protest.

Thanks in advance

There are already dla cuts threads on Mn; could I suggest C&P'ing this on there please? This sections tends to get limited traffic tbh

(section called mumsnet campaigns)

I have posted this under politics and campaigns but it is about the cuts to mobility for those in reidential care, so hope it helps

You can respond to the DWP consultation process by post or email. see www.dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2010/dla-reform.shtml You all have a chance to object until 14 February if you look up 'Disability Living Allowance Reform Public Consultation' If everyone objects it would be harder for them to ignore you. My son and his wife are both disabled and will suffer terribly.

If it helps you, this is my response to only one of the questions about taking DLA mobility away from those in residential care:
Reference Question 5 Para 21, Page 15: the payment of the mobility component of DLA (or the PIP equivalent to this allowance) should depend on the needs of individuals rather than their place of residence. To obtain the mobility component of DLA, the disabled in residential homes should have to show that they need and can use it. This is the opinion of my family, the residents in their home, those who run the home and their care managers. They make the following points:

1. The Government?s proposal to remove the DLA mobility component from people living in residential care is due to a mistaken belief that the disabled in residential homes are like hospital patients or residents in nursing homes and residential homes for the elderly, where residents spend the vast majority of their time in the homes or, as patients, unable to go out or being nursed. This is not the case at the Disabilities Trust and similar homes for those with physical disabilities where getting out and about in the local community is a vital aspect of residents? everyday way of life. Residents in these homes must meet their own transport costs from their DLA mobility to access specialist transport to education, volunteering, day opportunities, libraries, shops, banks, public life and services, church, fitness activities, visits to friends and families. Many residents live at a long distance from their families who cannot help them with mobility needs.

1. The Government mistakenly thought that there was an element of double funding in that local authorities were already meeting the mobility needs of these residents. This is not the case. The cost of transport is not included in contracts with residential homes other than to cover needs deemed to be substantial and critical (usually medical). At the Disabilities Trust and similar residential homes residents must meet their own transport costs from their DLA mobility to access all the services listed in 1. above. The care home provides free transport to medical appointments and for medical matters but residents must pay for transport to support their normal activity.

1. Maria Miller, Minister for Disabled People, has now written to MPs and the public to say that, ?where individuals? needs are met through residential care, the local authority contracts with the care home to ensure that the agreed services are provided.? The Minister?s letter is seriously misleading. Her letter implies that transport to all the services listed in 1. above is provided free of charge in a contract and that residents therefore do not need a mobility allowance. This is not true.

Local authorities, whose budgets are already under considerable pressure, do not have the funds available to pay for these transport services nor do they have a statutory duty to do so. Generally their existing contracts with care homes do not cover assessed mobility. It has been confirmed to me that this is the case at the Disabilities Trust and that such arrangements are standard in the industry.

1. The Disabilities Trust points out that they do not have the staff, resources, finance or vehicles to provide the services to their residents which at present the residents provide for themselves out of the mobility component of DLA. I have been assured that the same would be true of similar residential homes. If they were legally obliged to assume this function, Government would ultimately have to fund their extra costs, costs that would be far greater than the current DLA mobility costs of £160 million. This amount is tiny when compared with the £81 billion of spending cuts planned by Government.

1. I question how much background research has gone into this proposal, whether it has been properly thought through and whether the Government fully understands how a particularly vulnerable sector of society will be hit hard if these changes are introduced in 2012. Article 20 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities commits signatories to ?take effective measures to ensure personal mobility with the greatest possible independence for persons with disabilities, including facilitating the personal mobility of persons with disabilities in the manner and at the time of their choice, and at affordable cost.? Removing the DLA mobility component from disabled people jeopardises this right. If the Government?s proposal is carried, these disabled people will have no means to pay for transport, will be confined to their homes, will be denied their independence, will be denied the right to access services and to participate freely in society. This is inhumane and tantamount to being imprisoned - in many cases for life.

1. This proposed cut is discriminatory and unjust in that disabled people who live at home and get help with personal care will continue to receive a mobility allowance, whereas those living in residential homes and getting help with personal care will be denied a mobility allowance. The latter are already means-tested for their care costs.

1. Confining a large number of disabled and vulnerable people in their homes, denying them the right to access services and participate freely in society, runs counter to the Government?s claim in the Coalition Agreement document that fairness would be at the heart of its decisions so that all those most in need would be protected.

1. Those who live in the Disabilities Trust and similar homes are very active people who have profound or complex needs. Many will need to live in this residential setting for the rest of their lives for long term assistance and support. Many will have no family to help them financially. If their only allowance to pay for their transport to the outside world is stopped, it will be of little consolation to tell them that their underlying entitlement remains so that they will not have to reapply when they leave the care home.

1. The proposed change is in conflict with other government policies on personalisation, independent living, ideas about dignity, respect and choice. Residential homes are not hospitals or nursing homes, nor are they prisons, or places to hide people away and then deny them opportunities that the rest of us take for granted ? Residential care homes are homes for people who need additional care, these people are full citizens and should be afforded their allowance to be mobile and participate in society as they see fit.

We know that savings are needed but this is too great a price to pay. This is not ?fairness and togetherness?, this is unfair, unjust, cruel and, frankly, offensive, inflicting isolation on the most vulnerable who are the least able to protest for themselves. Please withdraw this particularly nasty proposal.

Feel free to use any or all of the above and send it to Duncan Smith.