Re: ivan's conundrum / dis-ability / dat-ability

[Bob Anibal <boba@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This is for Ivan;
Have you investigated Medicaid - here in NY I understand  that aid is
available in home for situations such as yours, without impoverishing
yourself.  Medicaid is a federal program, but the different states have
different rules. I was told that you need someone very knowledgeable of the
rules to get anywhere with the SYSTEM.  See if you can find someone that
knows the rules.
Bob Anibal
----- Original Message -----
From: janet paterson <janet313@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <PARKINSN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 23, 1999 10:20 AM
Subject: ivan's conundrum / dis-ability / dat-ability


> hi all
>
> i've been mulling about ivan's situation too
> maybe because it's potentially close to my own
>
> ivan, you live alone with pd
> so do i, at the moment
>
> you need in-house personal care attendants / attendance
> i don't, at the moment
>
> you have been designated a disabled site
> by the Powers That Be
> so have i
>
> you are entitled to government financial assistance
> due to impoverishment
> so am i
>
> what are our living accommodation alternatives?
> 'hospital' sounds extreme and a waste of resources
> 'nursing home' sounds the same
> 'chronic care ward' ditto
>
> you and i would be trouble on four feet in such places
> managers of such places within a 100km radius of us
> should be quaking in their boots
> at the mere thought!
>
> what about something like 'assisted living'
> where help is optional
>
> if i,
> as a Designated Disabled and Dollar Disadvantaged Site,
> am entitled to grab bars in my bathroom installed at no charge
> by the Authority of the Powers That Be
> why would i not be entitled to
> home care assistance
> [be it washing my hair or my floor]
> or
> a motorised wheelchair
> or
> a vacuum cleaner
> or
> dental care
> or
> education assistance
> or
> a replacement bio-engineered arm
> or
> .......[fill in the blank]
> under the same terms?
>
> if such an item promoted my ability to live independently
> and thus more productively
> as well as
> [hellloooooo!]
> at a lower cost to the PTB?
>
> [not that cost/benefit ratios as applied to healthcare
> don't still make my skin crawl]
>
> i'd best stop all this mulling now
> before i get into real trouble
>
>
> janet
>
> janet paterson
> 52 now / 41 dx / 37 onset
> 613 256 8340 po box 171 almonte ontario canada K0A 1A0
> a new voice: <>
> <janet313@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>