Disability provision: "People don't know what help they can expect"

A spokesperson for the GDA said the current funding provision system is “challenging for families and individuals to navigate”. The Committee hopes that input from individuals with impairments and their carers will be included in recommendations within the Primary Care Review, due before the States in July.

“There is a general acknowledgement that there are weaknesses in the current system and that work needs to be done with charities and islanders with disabilities to understand their experiences and shape solutions accordingly,” said the GDA spokesperson.

Pictured: The GDA has said children with complex needs grow quickly and regularly need new equipment.

The spokesperson continued: “The current system is challenging for families and individuals to navigate and is especially hard on families of children with complex needs, who grow quickly and therefore regularly need new equipment that suits their size and stage of development.

“It is also challenging for adults with rapid degenerative conditions, such as motor neurone disease, who may need several increasingly-specialised wheelchairs, for example, in a space of a few years or even months.”

The current system allows individuals to apply for funding under section 10 of the Income Support (Guernsey) Law, 1971, which allows the Committee for Employment & Social Security (ESS) to make funding available on a “completely discretionary” basis.

Individuals can also apply to local charities for support.

Pictured: There is a specific Wheelchair Service available for islanders who need wheelchairs.

“ESS can make whatever decision it sees fit, within reason, as to whether or not to fund the equipment or adaptations someone is requesting,” said the spokesperson.

“In practice, this can allow ESS to make sensitive, individualised decisions on complicated applications. But it also means that people don’t know what help they can expect when they are facing significant costs; that two people in similar circumstances could be treated quite differently by the same Committee; and that different Committees, over time, could interpret this provision quite differently.

“This is not in accordance with the States’ commitment to fairness and transparency in the way that health and care services are provided, which is summed up in the guiding principles of the Partnership of Purpose, especially those relating to fair access to care, a universal offering, and user-centred care.

“Eligibility for services, including financial support from the States, should be based on clear and fair criteria, and those who are refused services should have a right of appeal.”