Social Security - Aspire and World Human Rights Day

Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

Two contentious areas of disability benefit reform relate to Employment Support Allowance (ESA) and Disability Living Allowance (DLA). Both areas are being severely criticised by disability groups and disabled people. DLA is a non-means tested benefit that recognises the barriers that disabled people face and the extra costs they incur because of their impairment. DLA is set to be replaced by Personal Independence Payments (PIP). PIP will still have the same aims to support disabled people. However, the government’s own projections show that they expect the case load, that is the numbers supported, to decrease. Within their own figures, they have also predicted that less people will receive higher mobility support.

ESA has had its problems stretching back to its creation. We have had negative reports over the years on the accuracy of assessments, assessment centres being inaccessible and the success rates of appeals.

Another damaging development has been the new under-occupancy penalties. This has been more commonly described as the Bedroom Tax. As a result of this welfare reform, we have found couples unable to share a room and people with heavy machinery being penalised for having what the government deems to be a spare bedroom.

Aspire believes that state should contribute and support disabled people if needed to live independently in society. Doing so has an overall positive effect on that person and will empower them to contribute to society too. We work with decision makers to get this argument across and we will continue to strive for this Human Right for disabled people.

Civic Participation - Aspire and World Human Rights Day

1)      Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.

2)      Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.

We are a democratic country and all have the right to participate and even be elected representatives. However, disabled people are significantly underrepresented in government and in Parliament. If Parliament was truly representative of society, there would be 65 disabled MPs in Parliament!   

Furthermore, people have found that even visiting Parliament can be a strenuous task for wheelchair users. Wheelchair users visiting Parliament have to be escorted around the building whereas non-wheelchair users practically can roam around freely in most of the public areas once they get through the security barriers. This is more different access than equal access.

The ability to vote and participate in elections is a key democratic right. In the 2010 Polls Apart report, research found that at 67% of polling stations surveyed, disabled people faced accessibility barriers. That’s an improvement of only 1% on the last general election, and just 2% on the election before. Progress is not moving fast enough.

Councils regularly review polling stations and as part of this, they should also ensure that there are as few barriers as possible at polling stations for disabled people. Staff training was also cited as an area that needs improvement. In one case study in the report, a voter felt totally ignored as the member of staff chose to communicate with their personal assistant rather than the individual voter.

The solutions for realising this Human Right are in better training for staff, wider voting options and greater accessibility of polling booths. Certainly the rate of improvement needs to change for the better. A 2% decrease in accessibility barriers faced since two general elections ago is nowhere near good enough.

Property - Aspire and World Human Rights Day

Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.

What happens when someone cannot get back into their own home following a spinal cord injury?

Every eight hours, someone is paralysed by spinal cord injury. Imagine if you have steps going into your home, or live somewhere with narrow corridors and no turning spaces. You might have a home, but you may not be able to access it. Your right of owning that property remains, but it can be agonising not being able to get into it.

Our research shows that 20% of people with Spinal Cord Injury are discharged to nursing homes. Often this is because of the lack of accessible housing available. Increasingly, Aspire is finding that people are unable to go back to their own place because care policies are becoming restrictive when it comes to delivering in people’s own homes. Some Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) as well as one local authority we are aware of, have set a cap on the amount that they are willing to spend on delivering care in people’s own homes. In such cases, an arbitrary percentage has been identified where if the cost of delivering care at home is above this percentage compared to receiving this care in a nursing or residential setting, the CCG or council will not meet the costs.

Essentially, this removes the individual’s whole lifestyle, family needs, work needs and places greater emphasis and importance in decision making on short term costs. Often this doesn’t recognise that the long term cost implications are far worse. The physical and psychological impact on people with Spinal Cord Injuries can be devastating as our research has found.

What’s more, people may have access to their property but cannot get to all areas of it. 37% are discharged to unsuitable housing meaning that they may well be in their own home, but not necessarily living in a way that encourages independence. They may not be able to access their own bedroom so are forced to live downstairs. This can be a horrible experience if your bathroom is also upstairs.

Through one of our surveys, a Spinal Cord Injured person in Cornwall told us, "I have no life as such. I live in one room. I can't get out." The psychological impact in living in these circumstances is damaging.

The Disabled Facilities Grant is key to helping people to adapt their own homes. However, it is a pot of money that is no longer ring fenced. At a time when funding for local councils is being heavily cut by the government it can be tempting to also reduce spend on adaptations.

If we are to recognise this Human Right for disabled people, we need more accessible housing and a better and more efficient Disabled Facilities Grant process. This would go a long way to fulfil the potential of disabled peoples’ rights to property.

Incitement of Discrimination - Aspire and World Human Rights Day

All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

There has been huge uproar, and Aspire believes quite rightly so, over some of the language that has been used in the media and even by leading politicians in the debate on disability benefits.

The media has been seen to showcase extreme cases of benefit fraud in their print and online articles. The words "scrounger" and "work-shy" have been casually used in the benefit reform debate.

Scope produced a report last year which found that:

· 73% of disabled people experienced the assumption that they don’t work
· 83% said coverage about benefits scroungers can negatively affect attitudes
· 87% said benefit scroungers themselves have a negative effect on attitudes

Disability hate crime is at its highest rate since records began. There has been great progress over the last 60 years but there is great concern about more recent trends.

What we need and what we are calling for is a more truthful representation of disabled people in society. Sadly, this does not make provoking headlines which is often what the tabloids are after.

However the Paralympic games in 2012 did show that as a society we could be positive about disabled people. However there is a line of argument that says that this positive view only applied to disabled athletes. Where the Olympic and Paralympic legacy has failed is harnessing and taking that positive mood to reflect on all disabled people in society. Society needs to come together to speak louder against such injustices and promote a more positive and accurate reflection of disabled people’s contribution to society.

We need more disabled people at universities, mainstream schools and workplaces. The opportunities need to be there for disabled people to access mainstream services so that people can recognise the truth.

A lot of work is needed and a significant culture change in how disabled people are viewed and treated is needed to realise this Human Right.

Dignity - Aspire and World Human Rights Day

All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 1 in the Universal Declaration for Human Rights addresses the issue of dignity. But what is dignity for a spinal cord injured person?

We estimate that around 25,000 people with spinal cord injury receive some form of care or support to meet their health and social care needs.

People with higher level spinal cord injuries often receive 24 hour care, seven days a week to help with day to day tasks as well as fulfil medical needs.  Having someone there to turn you over in bed, to get you out of bed, provide bowel and bladder care is very intrusive.

What helps is when people’s preferences are listened to. Often these relationships can work well when people actively engage, interact and, as strange as it sounds… be human.

A respondent to our care survey told us, “the carers I have are fantastic, and I think of them as friends and equals. The social services team my Council are brilliant and so are the rehab team at my hospital who had the first contact with the social workers.”

Some on the other hand have a personal preference to have their personal assistants come in, do the job and leave. Personal assistants, district nurses and carers need to be mindful of the need to listen to the person they are caring for.

Even when undergoing assessments for disability benefits or social care provision assessors are seeking minute details on people’s lives. Often this is beyond what is actually relevant to the support being assessed for. 

When it comes to personalised social care, what people spend their direct payments on is heavily monitored by some local authorities. Of course they have a duty to account for money that they are spending on care packages, but some of systems for reporting information are far too invasive and intrusive. Some local authorities still insist on receiving paper copies of every penny people spend with their direct payments, making the whole process bureaucratic and burdensome at the same time. 

People deserve the right to be treated with dignity and local authorities and health commissioners need to be mindful of the feelings of the person being cared for too when carrying their duties. Regular training to care agency staff to instil a culture where the person’s wishes are always at the forefront of staffs’ minds would go a long way to ensure people are helped with greater dignity.

 

Aspire and World Human Rights Day

10^th December 2013 will mark 65 years since the United Nations General Assembly's adoption and proclamation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The day is known internationally as World Human Rights Day. 

In the run up to 10^th December, Aspire will be looking at seven specific articles in the Declaration. We will be highlighting the significance of the articles along with the shortfalls of progress and how we should be improving to ensure we are meeting the obligations that we have signed up to as a nation.

We’ll start off with Article 25 to warm you up and set the scene; 

Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family including food, clothing, housing, and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

Nonetheless, this is the only Article which specifically mentions disability out of all 30 articles.  What it enshrines is that in the event of adversity beyond someone’s control, people should be supported to the right security, food, clothing, medical care and necessary social services.

Recent evidence shows that this is becoming more and more difficult for disabled people in Britain today. More people are turning to food banks for help, benefit cuts mean that less well off people have less money for clothes and medical care and social services are becoming more restrictive as the NHS and local councils feel the pinch of budget cuts.

In the days ahead, we will be writing on specific Human Rights articles on dignity, discrimination, property, civic participation, social security and employment.

Stay tuned to our website and social media channels over the coming days for more on World Human Rights.   

Keeping the flame alive

Yesterday, a House of Lords select Committee published a report on the legacy of the Olympic and Paralympic Games. The Committee has been specifically set up and tasked to look into this issue.

Two areas that were reported on focused on the drive to increase participation and the perception of disabled people.

We found some positive statistics in the report. There has been in increase of 353,000 disabled people participating in sport once a week since 2005/06. Sport England was highly praised after adapting its funding arrangements after the Games to target disabled people.

However, it was noted that participation amongst disabled people was around half the rate of participation of non-disabled people in sport.

The will is there, with the report citing that 8 out of 10 disabled people were considering taking up sport after the Games. 70% of disabled people agreed that the Games were inspirational for them.

Yet the report admits that this positive hope is hindered by practical barriers. Barriers such as untrained staff to cater for disabled customers and lack of appropriate equipment. Indeed, when we reported on disability and the fitness industry back in 2011, we called for:

·         Greater participation rates of disabled people in sport and leisure.

·         Better inclusive fitness provision within the leisure industry, with accessible equipment being available at all sites. 

·         Better understanding and awareness of inclusive fitness in the fitness industry.

·         More instructors in the leisure industry trained to work with disabled people. 

All these asks are still as relevant today as when we conducted our research before the Olympic and Paralympic Games. Our InstructAbility Programme, which looks to increase the pool of disabled fitness instructors in the country, is going some way to address some of the shortfalls we found.

The findings on changing perceptions of disability show there is great room for improvement. The period after the Games saw a more favourable impact on how disability sport was perceived. But this is in great contrast to how disabled people in society are viewed; the fact that disability hate crime statistics are ‘the worst they have ever been in 10 years of reporting’ would suggest that the Games have failed to create a positive legacy on perceptions of disabled people.

Unfortunately, the only recommendation stemming from this point in the report is for the government to continue to monitor public perceptions of disability and to continue to promote disability athletics. We believe this call should be more ambitious and that the committee should be bolder in their ask to government to use the legacy to improve perceptions of disabled people. Not doing so fails to hold to account the progress of the lasting legacy of London 2012.