[vicsireland] Re: you're out if you're over 65
- From: "Mike Meaney" <mikemean@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <vicsireland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 17:59:05 +0100
Thank you ed,
The only people that think I'm worth it is the polotitions, they keep telling
me that my vote is very important to them.
You are left sometimes to think that you have outlived your usefulness.
But there's life in the old dog yet!!
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: Ed Harper
To: vicsireland@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 2:14 AM
Subject: [vicsireland] Re: you're out if you're over 65
Hi Mike, I think ageism is one of the most stupid of prejudices. It seems
to be the case that many people seem to have failed to notice they we all get
old. But the next question is what is old? That seems to vary from
organisation and law to law. In reality chronological age is about the
roughest of guides ever invented for mental or physical function. I don't
know for sure, but I would be very surprised if it wasn't the case that the
range of ability or disability in a given age group probabably follows a random
distribution curve around a mean point. If regulations based on who needs
what, or who is worth giving what to, are based on this mean nead then many
people will not receive wht they need. If the disqualification for equipment
assistance depends on the likely increase in the functional utility to
"society" of the individual, rather than the increased function for the benefit
of the individual, then frequently the drop off in functional return for
"society" is mainly brought about by society's socially determined
categorisation of a particular age group as useless or nearly so. If a group
over a certainage is defined as useless and therefore not worth assistance in
getting adaptive technology, then if the definition is correct surely that
groupp becomes more eligible on the grounds of impairment and the need for
compensation to those individuals in that group for their perceived
disadvantage. We are all equal citizens, or should be, certainly after the
age of majority and before the age of senility. Majority is fixed by law.
Why should senility be also similarly fixed? I would argue that even the age
of majority is a very crude and discriminatory device, but at the other end of
life it is unforgiveable.
Sory for the length of this note, but I seem to have been running into a lot
of ageism directed at both the old and the young recently.
All The Best
Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: vicsireland-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:vicsireland-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Mike Meaney
Sent: 04 May 2007 13:23
To: vics ireland
Cc: irelandvipnews@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [vicsireland] you're out if you're over 65
Hello listers,
I bought a new Computer and decided to enquire about getting help from the
pool of aids, first to find out that someone had registered my version of Jaws.
I asked then was it true that if you were over 65 you were out, and was
told to contact my local office, I did that to discover it was true. But it was
the fault of the health board. I rang and was told first they never heard of
JAWS or any software for the blind, and if I had purchased it I wouldn't get a
refund. And if they could give me one I'd have to have a medical Card, but I
wouldn't get that till I was 70.
I am very annoyed over this because I know there are many members and non
members out there who are working with versions of Jaws that are ancient and
many of them would not be able to afford 1171.65 Euro for the latest version.
I would like if Vics could bring this up at their next AGM and find out
where the problem lies.
I have been on this list for years and hear members who are working
discussing their new version of JAWS, Can you imagine how the other people with
out of date versions feel.
Any suggestions would be welcome.
If I wanted a zimmer frame or a commode I'd also have to have a medical
card.
I must try to stay healthy and mobile.
Mike.
Other related posts:
