Pensions ,Prescriptions & Racheal Reeve’s

You posted while I was typing Doodledog

Jaxjacky

I don’t know how much prescription medication my friends and siblings take, not a subject we’ve discussed.

We moved from a big city to a small seaside town. Friends and family stay on a frequent basis, I often say I'm running a guest house but no one pays the bill as they leave. I see people taking their meds, I see their pills lined up in the kitchen where they leave them so they can go and get a drink and take them. I don't discuss it, I observe it.

This is what worries me about the euthanasia idea.

Doodledog

Agreed, but as has been pointed out, you can’t buy them weekly (or monthly). They can only be bought quarterly or annually, which represents a significant outlay for someone on a low income.

But not everyone aged 60 and over is on a low income. If we are talking about equalising free prescriptions with SRP age then we have people of 60 to 66, many in good or reasonable health, many still working, so why would they be any more in need of automatic free prescriptions than say an 18 year old care leaver living in a bedsit earning minimum wage, let's remember minimum wage for them would be £8.60 an hour so for a 36 hr week that would be just under £310 per week and they'd pay tax and NI from that so less than £300 a week to live on and probably a lot less if they are on a zero hours contract and the and 16 to 24 year olds are the most likely age group to be on zero hours contracts. The 60 year old could earn the same working 27 hours a week. Or maybe a single mother with two children, she'd probably like some help as well.

I don't accept that everyone over 60 or 66 is one of the "most vulnerable" in society. There are a lot of vulnerable babies, children, young disabled out there. I'm a pensioner but I don't think I deserve special treatment just because of my date of birth but I would be happy to be treated the same as anyone else regardless of age.

We don't have limitless amounts of money and until that improves I think help should be targeted and that means I won't be one of the ones getting help so not arguing for myself.

Rather than wanting free prescriptions for people of 60 to 66 I'd be more interested in a campaign to help disabled pensioners, I can't understand why Attendance allowance has no mobility component like DLA, are we expected to be housebound because we hit 66? Again not relevant to me but it strikes me as very unfair.

I do think some help with staging the payments for the prepayment for prescriptions would be useful, maybe giving people time to build up to the full payment or like the TV licence where you can go onto monthly payments.

I would think Attendance Allowance has no mobility component because Attendance Allowance is not means tested. Therefore it is meant as a help towards the extra living costs incurred by older people who need some help around the house, or with personal care, in order to keep them independent. It used to be called Independent Living Allowance which explains its point somewhat better. My mother was able to claim Attendance Allowance for many years because she was unable to do certain things as she got older, because she had certain conditions. For example, she couldn’t wash her own hair, which necessitated a weekly visit to the hairdresser. She could no longer do her own gardening or housework, and so she needed help with those. She suffered from a number of conditions which made it impossible for her to do these tasks herself. However, although she was unable to walk far, because she had a heart condition, she could still drive and use her car. She finally stopped using her car at age 91. She didn’t need a mobility allowance, she needed help and support to live reasonably independently.

I’m not disagreeing with you, theworriedwell. I don’t think allowances should be based on age. I was objecting to the way the cost of a ‘season ticket’ was broken down to an amount that sounds cheap when people are not able to pay in that amount.

Doodledog

I’m not disagreeing with you, theworriedwell. I don’t think allowances should be based on age. I was objecting to the way the cost of a ‘season ticket’ was broken down to an amount that sounds cheap when people are not able to pay in that amount.

4 x 3 month prepayment certificates cost quite a bit more than a 12 month certificate, so poorer people are being penalised.

maddyfour

I would think Attendance Allowance has no mobility component because Attendance Allowance is not means tested. Therefore it is meant as a help towards the extra living costs incurred by older people who need some help around the house, or with personal care, in order to keep them independent. It used to be called Independent Living Allowance which explains its point somewhat better. My mother was able to claim Attendance Allowance for many years because she was unable to do certain things as she got older, because she had certain conditions. For example, she couldn’t wash her own hair, which necessitated a weekly visit to the hairdresser. She could no longer do her own gardening or housework, and so she needed help with those. She suffered from a number of conditions which made it impossible for her to do these tasks herself. However, although she was unable to walk far, because she had a heart condition, she could still drive and use her car. She finally stopped using her car at age 91. She didn’t need a mobility allowance, she needed help and support to live reasonably independently.

PIP isn't means tested.

Just to give an example my husband is disabled, he has been disabled for over 30 years. He gets DLA as he was on it before retirement age and I believe that is the same rule for PIP. If I had a medical condition start today that had exactly the same symptoms and problems I could claim attendance allowance which is great. The problem is I would get roughly £300 a month less help than he gets. Now I don't know if the conclusion would be he and people like him are getting too much or people like the imaginary me are getting too little but it is clear that we wouldn't be being treated equally.

My husband's £300 a month finances his car which does improve his mobility. Due to pain and reduced movement he can't get in or out of a small car so we have a big car, high off the ground which means he can get in and out and gives him mobility. We would still have a car if he didn't get that £300 but it would probably be older and less reliable but we would be lucky as some disabled pensioners won't be able to afford a car.

growstuff

Doodledog

I’m not disagreeing with you, theworriedwell. I don’t think allowances should be based on age. I was objecting to the way the cost of a ‘season ticket’ was broken down to an amount that sounds cheap when people are not able to pay in that amount.

4 x 3 month prepayment certificates cost quite a bit more than a 12 month certificate, so poorer people are being penalised.

It is £15.50 per year extra to pay it in the 4 payments. If you are one of the 60 year olds on 8 items a month that is a bargain as the 3 month certificate is cheaper than paying for 4 items.

It isn't unusual to pay a bit extra to have things in installments or for less time as there is an admin cost.

theworriedwell

growstuff

Doodledog

I’m not disagreeing with you, theworriedwell. I don’t think allowances should be based on age. I was objecting to the way the cost of a ‘season ticket’ was broken down to an amount that sounds cheap when people are not able to pay in that amount.

4 x 3 month prepayment certificates cost quite a bit more than a 12 month certificate, so poorer people are being penalised.

It is £15.50 per year extra to pay it in the 4 payments. If you are one of the 60 year olds on 8 items a month that is a bargain as the 3 month certificate is cheaper than paying for 4 items.

It isn't unusual to pay a bit extra to have things in installments or for less time as there is an admin cost.

Sorry I transposed a 0 and a 5. The 4 x 3 months certificates cost an extra £13.70 per year compared to the 12 month certificate. So it is a fraction over 26p a week extra.

theworriedwell

theworriedwell

growstuff

Doodledog

I’m not disagreeing with you, theworriedwell. I don’t think allowances should be based on age. I was objecting to the way the cost of a ‘season ticket’ was broken down to an amount that sounds cheap when people are not able to pay in that amount.

4 x 3 month prepayment certificates cost quite a bit more than a 12 month certificate, so poorer people are being penalised.

It is £15.50 per year extra to pay it in the 4 payments. If you are one of the 60 year olds on 8 items a month that is a bargain as the 3 month certificate is cheaper than paying for 4 items.

It isn't unusual to pay a bit extra to have things in installments or for less time as there is an admin cost.

Sorry I transposed a 0 and a 5. The 4 x 3 months certificates cost an extra £13.70 per year compared to the 12 month certificate. So it is a fraction over 26p a week extra.

Why not go the whole hog and say it's under 4p a day extra.
Given you think the season ticket is such an affordable bargain couldn't that be a justification to withdraw the concession of free prescriptions allowed for some lifelong conditions, given they aren't issued for all lifelong conditions?

Well under 4p a day is a bargain if you need med regularly isn't it?

Yes I think there is a discussion to be had about free prescriptions for some conditions and not others, I have no idea how they make that decision but I think the even stranger thing is getting all meds free even if they aren't connected to your qualifying condition.

However, I thought we were talking about removing the free concessions for 60 to 66 year olds and lining it up with State Pension age so talking about working age adults. Presumably a 60 year old on a very low income would get the same help as an 18, 40 or 50 year old which seems fair to me. I don't see why one age group of working age adults should be treated differently to other age groups of working age adults. Yes a 60 year old might be on a low income, so might a 30 year old, a 60 year old might be on lots of med and so might a 30 year old. What is so special about being 60 rather than 59?

theworriedwell It's 4p a day extra if you pay in intalments.

Hands up here! I'm diabetic and haven't paid for prescriptions for decades. I agree with others that it seems strange that I haven't had to pay whereas those with other conditions (eg asthma) do pay. I've also had free eye tests and foot checks and know that my annual review is a gateway for me to get other treatment, plus I've been a priority for vaccinations.

I have 11 items on my repeat prescription and only one of them isn't related in some way to diabetes. I don't know when medications for diabetics became free, but I suspect it was as a result of vocal lobbying. Diabetes isn't just about having too much blood sloshing about blood, but affects almost every organ of the body (as I know to my cost, having ignored it when I was first diagnosed). I suspect that's why a decision was made to prescribe all medications for free, although I accept that could apply to other conditions.

Regarding my French pension. It seems that France is not increasing the French pension for a least the next six months, if not more.
At least the UK pension is triple locked.

theworriedwell apt name 😄for this subject, 18 year olds and younger people generally don’t need the amount of tablets that older folk take for their many ailments.I get your point that many families live close enough to the breadline to need a helping hand, but isn’t that what universal credit is meant to do?
I would make prescriptions free for anyone who can’t work from age 60 onwards, either retired, or just not feeling well enough to work, I really don’t think the age should be upped.
In Scotland, Wales and NI it’s free for everybody regardless of age anyway.

growstuff

theworriedwell It's 4p a day extra if you pay in intalments.

Yes, you said it costs quite a bit more and it actually costs 4p a day more. I suppose it depends if you think 4p a day is quite a bit more or not a lot more.

Oreo

theworriedwell apt name 😄for this subject, 18 year olds and younger people generally don’t need the amount of tablets that older folk take for their many ailments.I get your point that many families live close enough to the breadline to need a helping hand, but isn’t that what universal credit is meant to do?
I would make prescriptions free for anyone who can’t work from age 60 onwards, either retired, or just not feeling well enough to work, I really don’t think the age should be upped.
In Scotland, Wales and NI it’s free for everybody regardless of age anyway.

I honestly don't know why working age adults shouldn't all be treated the same, if they are entitled to means tested benefits then treat them the same, if they aren't entitled to means tested benefit then treat them the same.

I agree that generally younger people don't need as much medications as older people but two of the youngest people I know on medication are a little one with cystic fibrosis and a slightly bigger one with no thyroid function at all, in the old days he'd have suffered from cretinism which is thankfully an illness of the past. Of course they both get their meds free due to age but they won't be magically cured when they hit 18 and it does make the point that not all young people are healthy and equally not every 60 year old is ill. Can't we have it free for everyone or everyone too old or too young to work gets it free and everyone else is means tested?

growstuff

Hands up here! I'm diabetic and haven't paid for prescriptions for decades. I agree with others that it seems strange that I haven't had to pay whereas those with other conditions (eg asthma) do pay. I've also had free eye tests and foot checks and know that my annual review is a gateway for me to get other treatment, plus I've been a priority for vaccinations.

I have 11 items on my repeat prescription and only one of them isn't related in some way to diabetes. I don't know when medications for diabetics became free, but I suspect it was as a result of vocal lobbying. Diabetes isn't just about having too much blood sloshing about blood, but affects almost every organ of the body (as I know to my cost, having ignored it when I was first diagnosed). I suspect that's why a decision was made to prescribe all medications for free, although I accept that could apply to other conditions.

It would be interesting to know how they made the decisions. I haven't paid for years either as I have an underactive thyroid, in fact when my GP called me in to discuss my blood test results he said, (this is virtually word for word) "I have good news and bad new for you. The good news is you will never have to pay for a prescription again, the bad news is you will be on medication for an underactive thyroid for the rest of your life." I'd have preferred to pay for my prescriptions but I do think my condition is easier to manage than yours, I used to work with someone who had terrible trouble managing his diabetes but I don't know if it is always as difficult.

I don't get any of the other things you mention but I guess that is because they aren't particular problems for my condition. It is obviously all very complicated.

I saw a piece on the news yesterday about the NHS not funding a treatment for breast cancer that would give sufferers months, maybe years more life. The women they showed were quite young, some with young families, and it seemed heart breaking. I hope there is a campaign to get help for them.

Just wanted to add that untreated an underactive thyroid can also lead to life threatening conditions but then surely asthma can be life threatening as well?

Asthma is life threatening, and IMO the medication should be free. The thought of dying from an asthma attack is terrifying, yet many people must be at risk of that because of the cost of prescriptions.

I would like to see medication for long-term conditions free for people of all ages though, not just the very young and people over 60, who may well be working with no housing costs, unlike the average 30 year old, who is statistically likely to be paying high housing and childcare charges.

I don't know that the government could fairly start to charge the over 60s now though. People will have made the decision to retire based on knowing they would get medication free, and to add in another bill would be wrong when it's too late to go back to work.

I looked up hyperthyroidism which is the opposite to what I have, hypothyroidism. Both need medication, both can be fatal if untreated and one qualifies for free prescriptions and the other doesn't. It is weird what qualifies and what doesn't but that particular one is surely weird beyond weird.

theworriedwell

growstuff

theworriedwell It's 4p a day extra if you pay in intalments.

Yes, you said it costs quite a bit more and it actually costs 4p a day more. I suppose it depends if you think 4p a day is quite a bit more or not a lot more.

The real point though is you can't pay any season ticket daily, weekly or monthly, you have to stump up at least 3 months worth in advance. For someone who's struggling that can be too much. I don't understand why you appear not to get that and just keep stating a weekly cost which is not a payment option. My reducing it to a daily extra cost was supposed to illustrate the senselessness of using figures that aren't available as payment options.

Rosie51

theworriedwell

growstuff

theworriedwell It's 4p a day extra if you pay in intalments.

Yes, you said it costs quite a bit more and it actually costs 4p a day more. I suppose it depends if you think 4p a day is quite a bit more or not a lot more.

The real point though is you can't pay any season ticket daily, weekly or monthly, you have to stump up at least 3 months worth in advance. For someone who's struggling that can be too much. I don't understand why you appear not to get that and just keep stating a weekly cost which is not a payment option. My reducing it to a daily extra cost was supposed to illustrate the senselessness of using figures that aren't available as payment options.

Still missing that I was replying to a post saying it cost quite a bit more. Is 4p a day quite a bit more or just a bit more?

If you think about it someone who gets 3 items a month they have almost covered the 3 months in one month, if they get 4 items they are immediately benefitting, it is a good deal and remember the poorest can apply to get their prescriptions free.

I've said I think it would be good if they could introduce some sort of payment plan to spread the cost, maybe you didn't understand that and that would explain why you think I don't get it.

I’m sure Rosie* understands perfectly- she has said so several times.

Adverts often quote prices in tiny amounts- ‘only £3 a week or the price of a cup of coffee’ sounds much cheaper than ‘£156 a year or the price of a good night out’. It depends what you are trying to sell - affordability or luxury. The cost is the same, and more to the point those who might benefit from the affordable option can’t have it as it doesn’t exist.