Equipment icn future planning

It is usual, in a case of severe injury, to instruct an occupational therapist (OT) to visit the client at home (so that the client can be seen in the surroundings where he or she lives), assess all sensible and reasonable needs, and report accordingly. The training of an OT makes him or her particularly suited for this task, because this is what they do in the course of their working lives.

Some people need complex equipment (such as environmental controls, page turners, standing frames, washers and driers, hoists) and wear and tear must be taken into account. A more difficult aspect is the desire of the injured person to keep abreast of technology: some occupational therapists recommend that a specific sum should be included in the claim to cover the cost of replacing equipment which is not actually worn out, but which is obsolete.

Some equipment experts are not trained as occupational therapists, but have learnt about the equipment needs of disabled people in another way, for example if they are themselves paralysed. There is a traditional view that a further opinion to support the equipment expert's recommendations is necessary. It has also been argued that a claim for equipment should not be allowed by the judge because it was not supported by a doctor. Here, a more flexible view is needed. Typically, doctors may not be sufficiently expert in OT to give a worthwhile opinion, but there will be clear exceptions, for example medical consultants in spinal units who would be highly familiar with the need for equipment for their patients than would most other doctors.