Seven supermarket chains have introduced inaccessible fridges in their stores, say disabled shoppers

Disabled people from across the country have raised concerns about how seven major supermarket chains have introduced inaccessible fridges to stock fresh food in their stores.

Disabled shoppers have highlighted stores run by Aldi, Asda, Lidl, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s and Tesco, which they say have all introduced the chiller cabinets in recent months following refurbishments.

They spoke out after last week’s Disability News Service (DNS) news story which reported how Co-op was accused of discrimination after installing chilled food cabinets with inaccessible doors, preventing many of its disabled customers accessing fresh produce such as fruit, vegetables, milk, cheese and meat.

So far, none of the seven chains have confirmed whether they consulted disabled people before installing the chiller cabinets; whether they had carried out assessments of their impact on disability equality; how many of their stores will eventually be affected; and whether they believe their actions are discriminating against many of their shoppers.

One wheelchair-user posted a picture on Twitter of an inaccessible chiller cabinet in an Asda store on the Isle of Wight, and said: “I had independence to shop. These doors stopped it.”

Another disabled shopper said: “All of them are seemingly going this way. Both Asdas near me now have doors.

“I get that it’s probably to conserve energy which I appreciate but it shouldn’t be at the expense of disabled people being able to buy freaking food. Ever.”

Disabled campaigner James Ingram said a large Sainsbury’s had installed chiller cabinets with doors as part of a major refurbishment in north London, which was “actively disabling customers”.

Another disabled shopper said on Twitter: “The Aldi nearest to me has them and I’ve been forced to swap to another branch as they are inaccessible for me.

“Just hoping that that one doesn’t install them too.”

And a disabled former Co-op staff member said: “I worked in a Co-op for 15 years, went back last year to my old store and found a lot of it is inaccessible to me in a power wheelchair now. Made me sad tbh.”

Vikki Walton-Cole, co-chair of Surrey Coalition of Disabled People and a powerchair-user, complained to Sainsbury’s after it introduced the new fridges in its store in Cobham.

She told the store in a complaint email: “Previously I could park up parallel to a cold item shelf, raise my wheelchair and reach to the side to select the item I wanted.

“I have been happily shopping in this way since 2022 when I was given this current chair and my independence greatly improved.

“I was therefore shocked, frustrated and dismayed that Sainsbury’s have decided to remove this ability from me and disable me further in their stores, and have moved into Eco Ableism with their new store designs.

“Adding doors onto all the cold item cabinets requires someone to have two full strength working arms to open and select an item.

“Additionally it prevents a wheelchair user from getting close to the shelves, having only the ability to go in forwards and therefore be unable to get physically close to the shelves.

“That is if a wheelchair user can even open the doors which I was unable to do.”

But Sainsbury’s refused to provide any equality impact assessment it might have carried out; failed to say if it would halt any ongoing plans to introduce the cabinets until an investigation had taken place; refused to share any access advice it had received; failed to provide contact details for its legal department; and failed to promise to ensure every aisle with the new fridges had a staff member available to assist a shopper who needed help.

Instead of answering these questions, a Sainsbury’s manager told her to “seek your own independent advice” if she remained “unhappy”.

Walton-Cole told DNS: “Whilst I appreciate that I can, and do, shop online, sometimes I like the independence of popping in to pick up anything that we forgot or wasn’t available online.

“This is quickly being swept away and I am reliant on there being enough staff to assist me, which I wasn’t before.

“I’ve seen some places do sliding door cabinets, which were slightly better in that you could at least get a bit closer (provided there were no low-level displays).

“But there needs to really be a solution that disabled people are included in finding.

“We also don’t want a climate emergency but not at the expense of us being totally excluded from basic everyday living.”

So far, not one of the seven chains – Aldi, Asda, Co-op, Lidl, Morrisons, Sainsbury’s, Tesco – has said if it consulted disabled people before installing the chiller cabinets; whether it had carried out assessments of their impact on equality; how many of its stores will be affected; and if it believes its actions are discriminating against disabled people.

One chain, Asda, had not commented at all by noon today (Thursday).

Despite the complaint lodged by Walton-Cole, Sainsbury’s claimed in an email to DNS that no problems had been reported with the new fridges.

A Sainsbury’s spokesperson said: “This style of chiller cabinet is currently in a very small proportion of our stores and the needs of our disabled customers were factored into their design.

“We also continue to provide our assisted or accompanied shopping service to anyone who would like support.”

It said it had installed vertical handles on the chiller doors, rather than putting them at a single fixed height, for accessibility reasons.

Aldi claimed its cabinets complied with the Disability Discrimination Act – which is now nearly 15 years out of date – and were made of lightweight material, and that it had widened its aisles to ensure room for customers to pass while the doors are open.

Aldi said in a statement: “Making our stores accessible and inclusive for all customers is important to us and our store colleagues are always on hand to help any customers who may need further assistance.”

Morrisons said in a statement: “We have colleagues around the store to offer assistance to customers where necessary.”

Tesco said in a statement that “all customers can ask a colleague if they need any assistance” and added: “We have been installing doors on our chiller units as one initiative to move us towards our zero emissions target.

“Our design standards governance team evaluate the impact of any changes to our stores that may impact on the customer shopping experience.

“We will continue to note customer feedback and keep these changes under review.”

A Lidl spokesperson said: “Where we have doors in place, it’s to preserve the required temperatures, as is standard across the industry.

“Our doors feature long, easy-to-grip handles positioned at a convenient height and are designed to be lightweight, making them easier to open.

“Additionally, the glazed doors also deliver energy savings of up to 40 per cent, helping us reduce our scope one and two emissions.

“Should any customer require support, we have assistance bells at the front of our stores that alert a team member.

“Careful consideration is given to the accessibility needs of our customers during the design of our stores, and we make adjustments wherever reasonable and possible to ensure a pleasant and accessible shopping experience.”

Co-op has still refused to answer key questions about the chiller cabinets for the second week.

It claimed it worked with “disability organisations to guide us to do the right thing” and that measures it had taken included “ongoing colleague training to provide help and advice to any customers requiring assistance, clear signage at key locations on how to request assistance, and reviewing product placement”.

A Co-op spokesperson said: “These steps sit alongside collaboration with accessibility consultants including aims to proactively identify further enhancements in our stores.

“Where energy saving chiller doors have been fitted, it is to cut our emissions and reduce carbon, to help us reach climate targets.

“However, we are committed to actively participating in wider industry discussions and prioritising designs that reach a balance of both meeting stringent sustainability targets and helping our valued customers who have accessibility needs and requirements.”

21 November 2024

DWP hides historic ‘fitness for work’ papers from National Archives

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has stopped sending key records from a crucial period in the history of disability benefit reform to The National Archives so they can be viewed by researchers.

Under the Public Records Act, government departments have to identify documents of “historical value” and transfer them to The National Archives by the time they are 20 years old.

But DWP has not sent any records relating to papers seen and signed by ministers and senior civil servants for more than three years, with the last batch of records only covering documents up to and including 2002.

The missing records are likely to cover the early years in the development of employment and support allowance (ESA) and the work capability assessment (WCA), which were both introduced in 2008.

In the years following 2008, the WCA process was associated with hundreds, and probably thousands, of suicides and other deaths of disabled people seeking out-of-work disability benefits.

A spokesperson for The National Archives confirmed this week that the last transfer of records from DWP in relation to “’ministers and senior officers’ papers” was in 2020 and covered records up to 2002.

The National Archives made it clear that it is government departments that decide which documents are sent to the archives, and when, and that it plays no part in those decisions.

Other major government departments, including the Home Office, the Treasury – which provided former chancellor Gordon Brown’s private office papers – the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and the Prime Minister’s Office, have all sent records from 2003 to The National Archives.

DWP declined to produce a statement but claimed it had provided all relevant files to The National Archives.

Records previously released to The National Archives have shown how the “bureaucratic violence” of the Department of Social Security (which later became DWP) grew slowly during the 1990s through the actions of ministers and senior civil servants who devised the all work test, a forerunner of the WCA, which was introduced in 1995.

The documents are detailed in The Department*, a new book by Disability News Service editor John Pring, which describes how DWP later spent years covering up evidence of the links between its actions and the deaths of claimants.

Among the records were documents that showed how civil servants plotted to sideline GPs from their central role in the process of determining fitness for work.

A memo from 1992 showed how Conservative social security secretary Peter Lilley first told civil servants that he wanted to know more about how the insurance industry approached “sickness insurance”.

Another memo, from April 1993, described how ministers insisted that the new incapacity benefit – which was introduced in 1995 alongside the all work test – should “cost substantially less”, while the department should “aim to create an environment which encourages greater private sector provision”.

Other documents later revealed that the Department of Social Security was told of three deaths in late 1996 and early 1997 that were closely linked to the new all work test.

It is likely that key documents seen by Labour ministers and senior civil servants from 2003 onwards will include similar revelations concerning the initial development of the WCA and ESA.

Although the records that have been held back by DWP relate to decisions taken under the Labour government, the department’s decision to prevent them being sent to the National Archives was made under the last Conservative government.

*The Department: How a Violent Government Bureaucracy Killed Hundreds and Hid the Evidence, John Pring’s book on the deaths linked to DWP, is published by Pluto Press 

21 November 2024

Concern over Kendall’s ‘truly chilling’ assisted suicide comment

Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall is at the centre of controversy over her public expression of support for legalising assisted suicide, following a comment she made to the BBC that has horrified campaigners.

Kendall told the BBC’s political editor, Chris Mason – although the comments were not broadcast – that part of the reason legalising assisted suicide was important was to give “choice and control” to families.

Kendall told the BBC last Thursday that she was strongly in favour of legalising assisted suicide, and she told Mason: “As more and more of us experience looking after our loved ones at the end of their lives, giving families, giving people, that choice and control is so, so important.”

Her comments horrified disabled campaigners and allies who are opposed to legalisation, as they suggest that family members should have a role in deciding whether someone should take their own life, if the bill becomes law.

They were described on social media as “truly chilling”, “very disturbing” and “pretty horrifying”, with one disabled women commenting on Twitter: “She talks as if she’s bringing out a range of soups.”

Caroline Richardson, an activist and member of the online Spartacus network of disabled researchers, said: “If indeed Liz Kendall is of the belief that families should be given any sort of control over assisted dying, then her role at the DWP is untenable.

“It may be that this is not actually her statement, but unfortunately it will be impactful to the debate, and appeal to those who see assisted dying as an alternative to family caring, social care, end-of-life care, palliative care and hospices, all of which are massively underfunded.”

Those campaigning for the legalisation of assisted suicide have repeatedly insisted that relatives will not be able to coerce a terminally-ill person into ending their life early, and that the safeguards in Leadbeater’s bill are, in her words, “the strictest protections and safeguards of any legislation anywhere in the world”.

Kendall’s comments only became known because they were posted on social media by the Guardian’s highly-respected political editor, Pippa Crerar.

But Kendall’s comment about families does not appear in either the report that was broadcast on BBC’s News at Six or a written version that appears on the BBC website.

It appears that Mason may have shared a transcript of Kendall’s comments with Crerar.

The BBC said this morning (Thursday) that it was not unusual for lobby journalists to share the transcripts of political interviews.

A BBC spokesperson said: “Not every word said in an interview can always be included in coverage, for reasons of space and timing.”

Neither the Department for Work and Pensions nor Kendall’s parliamentary office had responded to a request to comment by noon today (Thursday).

Labour MP Kim Leadbeater finally published her terminally ill adults (end of life) bill last week, giving MPs just 17 days to digest the contents of the private members’ bill before they debate and vote on it next Friday (29 November).

Momentum appears to be with opponents of the bill, particularly because of concerns that the country’s NHS, social care and palliative care systems are in such a dire state that legalisation would be unsafe.

Health and social care secretary Wes Streeting, who says he will vote against the bill, has raised particular concerns about the quality of palliative care services.

Disabled people’s organisations last week delivered powerful statements opposing the bill, with Inclusion London warning that after “14 years of austerity and broken public services… choosing to die may seem like the only viable option”.

21 November 2024

Rail company’s ‘stealth’ ticket office cuts plan is ‘unforgivable’ and ‘horrendous’

Disabled campaigners have described the decision of a publicly-owned rail company to carry out partial closures of ticket offices by “stealth” as “unforgivable” and “horrendous”.

Their comments came as the rail regulator contacted Southeastern to ask how it would comply with its duties to disabled passengers, after last week’s revelations that it has planned the partial closures of 14 ticket offices across its network.

The Office of Rail and Road (ORR) said this week that it had contacted the publicly-owned rail operator following the revelations by the Association of British Commuters (ABC).

Ruth Cadbury, the new Labour chair of the transport select committee, suggested that her members would “take an interest” in the concerns as part of their inquiry into accessible transport, although she declined to comment directly on ABC’s revelations.

Meanwhile, the Rail Delivery Group (RDG), which represents the companies that run Britain’s railways, declined to comment on Southeastern’s ticket office opening hours, but said it was not aware of other train operators planning similar cuts.

The government has already said it is examining Southeastern’s plans “to ensure passengers remain supported”.

Disability News Service reported last week that Southeastern was cutting the opening hours of ticket offices at 14 stations in Kent, East Sussex and south-east London by six or seven hours a day, for at least five days a week, through its secretive Ticket Office Project Change Programme.

Southeastern has avoided the need for a public consultation by describing the changes as “minor” under schedule 17 of the guidance that covers ticket office opening hours.

There are fears that the cuts in opening hours could have a significant negative impact on many disabled passengers and others who need support to use rail services.

The cuts were originally proposed two years ago, so Southeastern has already secured Department for Transport (DfT) approval from the last government.

The partial closures appear to come on top of the operator’s failure to meet its existing duties on ticket office opening hours.

The National Federation of the Blind of the UK (NFBUK), which played a key role in defeating last year’s planned closures of nearly 1,000 ticket offices across the country, said the cutting of ticket office hours by Southeastern puts its members “at significant danger and disadvantage” because they cannot see platform staff.

NFBUK said it was “unforgivable and absolutely disgusting” that the cuts to opening hours were already being planned before last year’s announcement of mass closures by train companies.

An NFBUK spokesperson “This is not a minor change, it is a significant one, and the proposed changes need to be urgently U-turned.

“Ticket office staff are essential and there should be no reduction in staff hours at these stations.

“It is like our safety, our accessibility and our travel needs are once again being treated as dispensable.

“Louise Haigh [the transport secretary] needs to act urgently to stop this move by Southeastern and put a strong message to other companies thinking the same, that this is not acceptable.”

NFBUK also called on Haigh to “urgently investigate” anecdotal reports that train operators were not replacing staff who leave their jobs, which was leading to “staffing issues at ticket offices”.

Emma Vogelmann, head of policy, public affairs and campaigns at Transport for All, which also played a central role in last year’s campaign against the closures, said: “Last year, the British public spoke in the largest ever public consultation response.

“Their message was clear: ticket offices are essential, they help us all travel more safely and easily, including millions of disabled people.

“It’s worrying to see research from ABC showing that train companies are ignoring the public and trying to sneak closures through under the table.

“We offer our support to the researchers and campaigners behind the report; we need to make sure that ticket offices stay open for everyone.”

Sarah Leadbetter, a disabled accessible transport campaigner who also played a key role in fighting last year’s closure plans, predicted a year ago that new rail industry proposals on cuts to ticket office hours would follow.

She said the news revealed by ABC last week was “horrendous”.

She said: “If Southeastern can do this to its train station ticket offices, will this happen to the other ticket offices at train stations run by the other train companies?

“I know what it’s like to not have a ticket office open for part of the day, to not have someone there to help you in lots of different ways.

“It isn’t safe for someone that’s blind or visually impaired to wander up and down a platform to find a member of staff.”

Emily Yates, co-founder of ABC, has submitted a complaint to ORR about Southeastern’s actions, and has alerted the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

She said yesterday (Wednesday): “The issue at Southeastern is just a taste of what could happen if other operators decide to exploit the rules around schedule 17 to make ticket office cuts without consultation.”

Southeastern has insisted that it did not conceal the changes, that the new opening hours were publicised on its website and on station posters, and that additional platform staff will mitigate the impact on disabled passengers of the ticket offices not being open, while stations will remain staffed, “with accessibility and safeguarding assistance provided by platform staff”.

ORR declined this week to say if it had been aware of Southeastern’s plans before they were exposed by ABC; if it had any concerns about the impact of the reduced opening hours on disabled passengers; or if it was concerned that other train companies might be planning similar action.

But an ORR spokesperson said in a statement: “Changes to ticket office opening hours (including closures) are governed by the processes set out in the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement (TSA) and guidance published by the Department for Transport.

“ORR does not have a decision-making role on any changes to ticket office hours or closures.

“ORR’s role is to ensure that operators remain compliant with their regulatory and consumer law obligations.

“We have contacted Southeastern to initiate engagement on how they propose to remain compliant with the detailed requirements in our Accessible Travel Policy guidance while making changes to staffing arrangements.

“Operators need to secure our approval to any material changes to their Accessible Travel Policies.”

Ruth Cadbury declined to say if the transport committee was concerned by Southeastern’s plans and the possibility that it had breached its duties to disabled passengers, or if the committee would be investigating its actions.

But she said in a statement: “The newly-formed committee plans to continue to engage with stakeholders before concluding its inquiry into accessible transport.

“The consultation on closing ticket offices across the network was an area of significant concern during that inquiry, and our members will continue to take an interest in the actions of train operating companies in this space.”

RDG said it was not its place to have a view on Southeastern’s ticket office opening hours, and was not aware of other train operators that were planning similar cuts, although it had been made aware of Southeastern’s plans.

An RDG spokesperson said in a statement: “We have no formal decision-making role regarding ticket office opening hours and it is a responsibility of individual train operators to consult on such changes.”

21 November 2024

Mainstream is usually much cheaper, with ‘similar or better outcomes’ for disabled pupils, MPs are told

The most senior civil servant in the Department for Education (DfE) has told MPs that educating disabled pupils in mainstream schools is usually much cheaper and produces “similar or better outcomes” than using special schools.

Susan Acland-Hood, DfE’s permanent secretary, told the public accounts committee on Monday that improving support for children with special educational needs (SEN) in mainstream schools was “very near the top of the issues that are raised whenever I go out into schools and whenever I speak to teachers and heads”.

She was responding to questions from Labour’s Nesil Caliskan, the MP for Barking in east London, who had asked her to confirm that it was “much better in terms of value for money for the taxpayer to support our mainstream schools so that they can adequately meet the needs of children in terms of SEND*” (watch from about 17.06).

Acland-Hood told the committee she was “very careful about not implying that we think literally any need can be well met in a mainstream school, but we do see needs that are well met in mainstream in some places and not so much in others.

“And in that case, we do tend to see much lower costs for meeting needs in mainstream and similar or better outcomes.”

Caliskan, who was leader of Enfield council for more than six years, warned that the cost of meeting the needs of disabled pupils could “tip hundreds of local authorities over the edge in the coming months”.

She told the committee that the cost of supporting pupils with SEND was “by far the biggest single pressure” facing councils, alongside social care.

Caliskan said the cost of transporting disabled pupils to distant special schools was also causing a “particular pressure”, with some facing journeys of more than an hour.

Juliet Chua, DfE’s director general for schools, said the new government’s reforms aimed to “make sure that children and young people’s needs are being met in schools that are within their local communities”.

But in the short term, she said, DfE was working with local authorities to address the “very significant” increase in the cost of home-to-school transport since 2015, from £0.6 billion to £1.3 billion, a real terms increase of 77 per cent.

The committee also heard concerns raised by MPs about the difficulties faced by parents in securing an education, health and care plan (EHCP) for their disabled child.

Caliskan said: “Not a week goes past without me being contacted by a parent who is at breaking-point, who describes to me the process of trying to fight for a plan for their child.

“It is the job of a parent to do the best they can for their child, but at the moment, the system means they are fighting against it and it is causing a huge amount of stress and anxiety and it is too often the very families that need the most support that are finding themselves not able to get the plan they need for their child.”

Acland-Hood said it was “rational to chase plans” under the 2014 Children and Families Act so the idea that securing a plan was “the principal route to having your need met” is “going to have to be something that we, with ministers, look at”.

Labour’s Luke Charters said that 98 per cent of EHCP appeals were decided in favour of families, which he said “feels to me like a two-stage process that inherently actually favours better-off parents with the financial means to go to tribunal”.

He added: “The broken appeal systems is making it harder for poorer families, isn’t it?”

Acland-Hood said this headline figure of 98 per cent should “should give us all pause” although only “about two and a half per cent of appealable decisions go to appeal”.

But she said there was “a risk that [the system] favours those who have got the capacity to navigate” and “we don’t think that very adversarial processes is a positive feature of the system or one we should build on”.

She said the system currently encourages families to seek an EHCP as “more resource in the system goes towards supporting those who have statutory plans”.

And she said it becomes “more and more rational for as many people as possible to keep seeking those statutory plans because there’s less resource left for the people who haven’t got them.

“And breaking out of that vicious cycle has got to be an incredibly important part of what we seek to do and that’s why we’re focusing so hard on the support that you can get in the system without having to go through plan writing or assessment processes.”

Labour’s Anna Dixon said parents in her constituency were being “forced” into considering special schools because they could not secure the right support in a mainstream school, even if they had an education, health and care plan.

Acland-Hood said ministers had made it clear their “core focus” was on “really improving inclusive mainstream”, or “what every school should be able to do for a child with some needs that differ from their fellow pupils”.

She said this included supporting “resource-based provisions” that allow disabled children “to spend some of their time in mainstream classes and some being supported outside, which again, we think is a positive model” although such provision is seen “very variably across the country”.

It was an approach that was confirmed by schools minister Catherine McKinnell yesterday (Wednesday) in a speech at the Schools and Academies Show in Birmingham.

Acland-Hood told MPs on Monday that ministers still wanted to ensure “that specialist provision is available for those children for whom that is undoubtedly the right place to be”.

Helen Hayes, the Labour chair of the Commons education committee, said parents had “very, very little confidence in the ability of schools to deliver SEND support, that schools are struggling to do so, and that the government is behind on the recruitment of, and training of, SENCOs**”.

She asked what DfE was doing to “ensure that higher quality SEND support is more consistently available in mainstream schools”.

Chua said that “improving the offer through inclusive mainstream is absolutely the heart of our approach”.

She said civil servants have been “talking to ministers in some detail on this” and will bring forward further plans.

But she said they had already spoken of how they would look to remove the barriers to accessing the curriculum and assessments for children with SEN, and examine the role Ofsted plays in “promoting and getting very, very good practice on inclusivity”, while they were also “absolutely doubling down on high quality teaching” for disabled pupils.

*Special educational needs and disability

**Special educational needs co-ordinators

21 November 2024

Government must take firmer grip of ‘inconsistent’ wheelchair services, says report

A new report backed by wheelchair-users has called on the government to take a firmer grip of the inconsistent provision of equipment through NHS wheelchair services in England.

The report, commissioned by The Wheelchair Alliance*, follows years of concerns about the provision of inadequate wheelchairs by the NHS.

Wheelchair Provision: How to Drive Effective Change was launched at the House of Lords last week by the alliance’s president, Baroness [Tanni] Grey-Thompson, and it completes a trio of linked reports published in 2022, 2023 and 2024.

The first two reports highlighted the issues disabled people experienced with wheelchair services, and the “false economy of providing wheelchairs that are not fit for purpose”.

The latest report makes a series of recommendations that aim to tackle “the postcode lottery, long waiting times, issues in the supply chain and ensuring that the voices of wheelchair users are heard”.

The researchers carried out 19 in-depth interviews with wheelchair-users about their experiences of wheelchair services, as well as conducting interviews with NHS and wheelchair sector professionals.

One of the wheelchair-users interviewed, Martin, said his wheelchair service assessment “didn’t address how [his] wheelchair would fit into his daily life” while “key sections of the assessment form, used to explore health and wellbeing aims, were left blank”.

As a result, his wheelchair “limits his ability to live independently and fully engage in activities that matter to him” and has “become more of an obstacle than a support”.

Another disabled person interviewed by the researchers, Kerry, said she had experienced “multiple problems with a slow and unreliable wheelchair maintenance service”, with her powerchairs breaking down multiple times over the last 14 years.

A third wheelchair-user, Paige, described the “chaotic” process she had to undergo from the wheelchair service which included an assessment that she saw as “a missed opportunity in finding a wheelchair that would fit her wider life”.

She was given a wheelchair that was “heavy, cumbersome, and impractical for her everyday life”, and which led to her returning it and instead using her own money to buy a wheelchair that better suited her needs.

Among the report’s recommendations, it says there should be a senior figure from NHS England appointed to oversee wheelchair services in England, while each NHS integrated care board (ICB) should have its own commissioner to plan, fund and contract for wheelchair services in their area.

It also calls for NHS England to define national eligibility criteria, based on “identified need, not on available funding”; for wheelchair-users to be “fully involved in service design, delivery and improvement”; and for NHS England to hold each ICB wheelchair commissioner to account over the service they provide.

It also recommends improvements to the retail sector to ensure there is “appropriate clinical input” in sales of wheelchairs.

And it says the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) should take a “more active role” in ensuring the “quality and efficiency of wheelchair services”.

The report says it is “essential” that these recommendations are incorporated into the NHS 10-year plan, which is due next spring.

Nick Goldup, Wheelchair Alliance’s chief operating officer and chair, said: “Recent news stories have shown us that wheelchair provision in this country needs to be improved.

“It needs to be made a priority by the government and NHS and someone needs to take ownership of wheelchair provision and lead it to a better place.

“At the moment, there is a ‘data desert’ in terms of demand for wheelchair services.

“Much of the data currently available is estimated, out of date and not comparable to form a local and national picture.

“We need a central, accountable body to ensure consistency, no matter the postcode.

“It is a basic human right that everyone who needs a wheelchair should get the right chair at the right time.

“By putting these recommendations in place, we can drive effective change together.”

The report was funded by Motability Foundation and produced by research companies Frontier Economics and Revealing Reality.

*The alliance campaigns for improvements to wheelchair provision in England, and aims to strengthen the voice of wheelchair-users, with its board and membership made up of wheelchair-users, commissioners, charity representatives and others with lived or professional experience and expert knowledge of wheelchair provision

21 November 2024

Children’s commissioner ‘increasingly dismayed’ at numbers ‘deprived of liberty by the state’

The children’s commissioner has said she has become “increasingly dismayed” by the number of disabled and other children with “complex needs” who are being deprived of their liberty by the state.

In a report commissioned by the Department for Education and NHS England, Dame Rachel de Souza said that more than 1,000 children a year who were not in secure settings in England were being subjected to high court deprivation of liberty orders*.

Many of them have learning difficulties, are autistic, or have experience of mental distress, mental ill-health or trauma.

The deprivation of liberty orders may allow them to be supervised constantly, prevented from leaving their accommodation when they want to, denied phone and internet access, and restrained by staff.

Dame Rachel said the children affected were often “extremely isolated, and largely hidden from view”.

Nearly all the children are in the care system, she said, but some are living in “highly unsuitable” settings, such as illegal children’s homes, Airbnb accommodation, or hospital wards while awaiting discharge.

As part of the report, her office interviewed 15 children in the care of English local authorities who had experience of having their liberty restricted.

They often questioned why they and their families had not been supported before their situation “escalated beyond their control”, and why their behaviour was often labelled as challenging and risky, “instead of being recognised as a response to trauma”.

Some of them, particularly those who were autistic or had a mental health diagnosis, had experienced multiple episodes of being physically restrained, which added to their distress.

One of them, who was 15 at the time they were interviewed, said: “I can say what I like, and people can pretend to listen, but it never gets took into consideration, ever.”

Another, aged 17, said: “When I was first on the deprivation of liberty order I wasn’t actually told anything about it… They told me to attend a court hearing via video link… I didn’t have any legal advice… I didn’t have a clue.

“They were just mentioning deprivation of liberty, this that and the other.

“I didn’t even know about it or what it was to be honest… I didn’t have a guardian at that stage… It was very, very quick.

“And then I moved to a worse, unregulated care setting.”

Dame Rachel said: “The fact that we have so many children living under these circumstances is one of the strongest arguments that can be made for the urgency of reforming children’s social care.”

She added: “We need more support for families and children early on, and a care system that is fit for purpose so that children do not reach crisis point.”

And she said that, for the “very small number” of children who need controls on their freedom to keep them or others safe, “we must make sure they have not only excellent, individualised care, but also full protection under the law”.

She also said there was a “clear and urgent need for more specialist children’s homes”.

The report concludes: “All children who are looked after in the care system should have safe and supportive homes.

“If this cannot be with kinship or foster carers, it must be in registered children’s homes with a nurturing environment, where children can feel safe, loved, and empowered to access the help they need to address their mental health difficulties, risks, and trauma.

“It should never be the case that a child is deprived of their liberty due to a lack of appropriate provision, or that a deprivation of liberty order is used to enable local authorities to place children in accommodation that would otherwise be unsafe.”

Among multiple recommendations, the report describes 10 goals, including that children have support to avoid a deprivation of liberty wherever possible; that they are heard and involved at all stages of any intervention; and that every looked after child “lives in a quality home that meets all of their needs”.

It also calls for a new legal framework to protect all children deprived of liberty; and it says  they should receive support for as long as they need it.

In response to the report, education secretary Bridget Phillipson said: “Children who have been deprived of their liberty are facing the most heart-breaking experiences, with many being retraumatised by a system that can’t meet their needs.

“That is why I’ve confirmed plans to break down the barriers to opportunity that they are facing, including by developing new community-based provision to meet their needs to give children the best life chances.

“Our reforms will go even further to give vulnerable children the best life chances by lifting the curtain on care providers profiteering off of vulnerable children, tackling unregistered placements and shifting the focus back to earlier intervention to help children achieve and thrive.”

*A deprivation of liberty occurs when restrictions are placed on a child, without valid consent, that are beyond what would normally be expected for a child that age

21 November 2024

Other disability-related stories covered by mainstream media this week

Tens of thousands of pensioners are expected to be driven into poverty by cuts to winter fuel payments, according to forecasts by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). However, the figures do not factor in the increased uptake of the pension credit benefit, which the government is encouraging the poorest pensioners to apply for in order to keep receiving winter fuel payments. Work and pensions secretary Liz Kendall disclosed the figures in a letter to the Commons work and pensions committee, with DWP releasing the figures in response to a freedom of information request to the Big Issue at the same time: https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-winter-fuel-payment-cuts-pensioners-poverty/

More than one in three children and a quarter of adults are living in poverty in the UK as deprivation levels rise to the highest in the 21st century, according to a report. The study found the cost-of-living crisis had plunged two million more people into severe hardship since 2019. It found the number of disabled people living in poverty since the pandemic had risen by 1.8 million to 8.7 million. More than half of all people in severe hardship in the UK now live in a family that includes a disabled person: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/18/more-than-one-in-three-uk-children-poverty-deprivation-record-high

Mental health patients in England are being harmed by the increase in placements in psychiatric units far from their homes and families, a new report indicates. Patients have had anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder, while some have died by suicide as a result of their distant placements, according to a Health Services Safety Investigations Body report, which drew on interviews with patients and their loved ones: https://www.theguardian.com/society/2024/nov/21/mental-health-patients-harmed-by-being-sent-to-units-far-from-home-report-finds

Lord Blunkett has called for an urgent review into “death trap” Tube platforms after he was injured falling into a gap as he boarded a train at Westminster station. It happened as the Labour peer, who is blind, slipped while getting on to a District line train with his guide dog. He wants Transport for London to do more to ensure blind and visually-impaired people are kept safe: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3rxzj9pe3yo

21 November 2024

News provided by John Pring at www.disabilitynewsservice.com