Carers allowance vs Attendance Allowance

margaretclare

Ted_Hutchinson wrote:

On average they (hip replacements ) last 10-15 years, what Margaret said was "If this second revision of hip replacement should fail again - or even if the opposite hip replacement, which is now 19 years old, should fail - I'll be back to square one"
I think she'd be mad to hand in her AA on the basis that for a few weeks she's been able to manage a little better than previously. One frosty morning and a slip on the ice and it won't be back to square one, it'll be far more serious. I'm not sure how old Margaret is, but one thing is certain and that is she isn't getting any younger. Falls are a major cause of disability and the leading cause of mortality due to injury in older people aged over 75 in the UK.

Thanks for your wise words, Ted.

The first hip was done in 1983 (I was 48 then) and lasted until 1997. It was revised then in the local BUPA hospital and lasted until last year, when it was revised again in December 2005 when I was 70. The second one was done in 1987 when I was 52 and so far is still going strong. My daughter had both hips replaced when she was 35, that was in 1996 and she's not as agile as I am now - she walks with a stick.

'Slipping on the ice' - can you see why I'm not too keen on walking up the road to the bus-stop and walking around in town, even in our little town centre? No, you're right, I shouldn't feel bad about accepting something which is of use to me, never mind all the things that other people think I should have and that I don't want!

And then there's DH with his knees - right one replaced in 1999, very successful, left one replaced in 2003, revised 2004, completely done again September this year, only just getting able to walk again properly. No, I'll hang on to the AA as long as I'm able and I really don't see why anyone should try to make me feel guilty for saying we need our car, just because 'many pensioners can't drive/can't afford a car'.

Margaret

seven-day-weekend

Margaret, I AM NOT trying to make you feel guilty for either having your car, driving it or receiving Attendance Allowance! I was just pointing out that some pensioners needed their bus pass and therefore the bus passes shouldn't be classed as uesless!

margaretclare

Ted_Hutchinson wrote: »

On average they (On average they last 10-15 years) last 10-15 years what Margaret said was "If this second revision of hip replacement should fail again - or even if the opposite hip replacement, which is now 19 years old, should fail - I'll be back to square one"
I think she'd be mad to hand in here AA on the basis that for a few weeks she's been able to manage a little better than previously. One frosty morning and a slip on the ice and it won't be back to square one, it'll be far more serious. I'm not sure how old Margaret is, but one thing is certain and that is she isn't getting any younger.

I knew there was a quote like this somewhere, and I've been looking for it. It has bugged me a bit recently that there have been people on Martin's site who think I am a liar and a fraudster because of receiving AA.

It's a bit like the saying 'if you want my parking space would you like my disability also'. In the last 10 years I've had major surgery 5 times, 2 of those were revisions of left hip 8 years apart. I had repair of bladder prolapse and also repair of rectal prolapse (you really don't want to know!!)

I've had falls and fractures (elbow then pelvis), I have a chronic back strain from the jobs I did in previous years and the gynae problems were from the same cause. It seems likely that I'll need another revision of hip replacement soon, right hip this time - have an appointment next month with the surgeon who did the second left hip revision in Dec 2006 because the right hip, which has lasted for 21 years, is beginning to tell me it needs attention. I can't use free bus passes because I still can't walk as far as the bus stop, so AA is useful in helping us keep our car on the road.

To apply for AA in the first place I used consultants' letters as evidence, and I took advice from experienced benefits advisers who said 'if you have bad days and good days, always describe the bad days'.

Thanks to Ted for your help and advice. And to those who think that someone like me is getting something I shouldn't, well, as I said before, you can have my disabilities if you resent me getting AA.

Ted, you're right - I'm not getting any younger (in fact I don't know of anyone who is!!) I'll be 73 this year, but the disabilities started years ago and in fact are not linked to age - it's a familial bony abnormality which I have unfortunately passed on to my daughter who had hips replaced aged 35.

dmg24

I'm not sure why this thread has been reopened after more than a year?

margaretclare

dmg24 wrote: »

I'm not sure why this thread has been reopened after more than a year?

This is the reason:

I knew there was a quote like this somewhere, and I've been looking for it. It has bugged me a bit recently that there have been people on Martin's site who think I am a liar and a fraudster because of receiving AA.

Ted, you were right.

One frosty morning and a slip on the ice and it won't be back to square one, it'll be far more serious.

It didn't even take a slip on the ice. It was a fine sunny day last June, I tripped on a kerb outside a petrol station, went over bang and fractured my pelvis. Another 8 weeks on crutches....

dmg24

Sorry, I still don't see why you have started up this thread again!

margaretclare

dmg24 wrote: »

Sorry, I still don't see why you have started up this thread again!

OK. So you don't see it.

dmg24

margaretclare wrote: »

OK. So you don't see it.

It just seems like you are opening up an old argument (a very old argument!)?

If you need advice or have further information on the subject in hand, then by all means post that question or information ...

healy

It seems pretty pointless to me too.

margaretclare

dmg24 wrote: »

It just seems like you are opening up an old argument (a very old argument!)?

No, the argument and nasty comments were as recent as last weekend. I am not entitled to AA according to some. I don't know why I should feel it necessary to justify my claim to a benefit which has been granted me or to defend my honesty, but for anyone who thinks I'm not eligible to it or that I'm getting it by suspect means, then read my comments and Ted's.