Presentation on theme: "What can Caxton do ?. Mike Dorricott – who am I ? 44 years old, married, 2 children, 2 dogs, 8 chickens and c. 1M bees Infected with Hepatitis C virus."— Presentation transcript:
Mike Dorricott – who am I ? 44 years old, married, 2 children, 2 dogs, 8 chickens and c. 1M bees Infected with Hepatitis C virus 4 times between 1982 – 1985. Mild haemophiliac Diagnosed HCV +ve June 1996 Liver transplant Oct 2000 HCC diagnosed June 2007 Second liver transplant Apr 2008 Retired on ill health grounds November 2008 HCV and fibrosis detected in new graft June 2009, but HCV ‘undetectable’ since Nov 2008 TaintedBlood committee member – here as an individual, not representing TB or the haemophilia community.
Caxton ? Believe that Caxton is an attempt by Government to : – level up the playing field between those infected with HCV only and those who have been receiving help from MFT / Eileen – allow the claim to be made that a package has been put together for all of those affected Potentially will be limited by : – direction given by Charities Commission – legal restraints – financial constraints This Government’s policy is made. Caxton is not the solution that many would want.
Caxton Objects … ‘to provide financial assistance and other benefits to meet any charitable need’…. ‘Needs’ are all relative, not purely dependent on income or assets.
Need is relative – pre impact Person APerson B Income£10 k p.a.£100 k p.a. Housing Benefit£500 per month£0 per month Mortgage£0£400 k Mortgage repayments £0£ 2,133 per month
Need is relative – post impact Person APerson B Income / ESA / Pension£5 k p.a.£40 k p.a. Housing Benefit£500 per month£ 0 per month Mortgage£0£400 k Mortgage repayments£0£ 2,133 per month Net position-£5 k p.a.-£60k p.a. Housing exposure- £ 2,133 per month Even with an income of £40k p.a. person B has arguably a greater financial exposure ( need) than Person A. Requires individual assessment of impact of infection
Maslow’s Hierachy of needs : Physiological need state should be met by employment, benefits, other income, plus guaranteed minimum income ( as MFT/Eileen/MFT) Caxton should look to top up the ‘Safety’ need state: – Personal – Financial * – Health /Well Being – Safety Net * Needs that Caxton should address
What must Caxton do ? Provide discretionary support to those infected with HCV in a similar way to that historically made by MFT / Eileen – No discrimination on severity of impact of disease i.e. irrespective of stage 1 or stage 2 or death – No discrimination on basis of income ( including any Skipton payments) – Not based on what MFT / Eileen / MFET does now, it must be based on what support has been made historically – Grants, loans, holiday payments etc Guarantee a minimum income for those in the most dire of financial need, not including any Skipton Fund payments in any qualifying criteria. Be a short term safety net for those undergoing treatment, or who have undergone treatment – time lag between employment stopping and benefits commencing ? Ensure that future support is consistent between Caxton, MFT, Eileen Trusts – No multiple claims from differing trusts – No one falls between the gaps.
What must Caxton do ? - continued Have clear criteria set regarding claims – Remove any subjectivity Be as simple as possible for claimants Take into account the impact of the disease on individuals Be appropriately publicised Retrospective ?