Parents turn to borrowing as unexpected costs and time off work take their toll
Parents of children with cancer are struggling to cope financially, with many families falling into debt, a charity warns today.
A survey for CLIC Sargent, the children's charity, said that the unexpected costs of travel, childcare, food and accommodation while their child has treatment means that 66% of parents have to turn to borrowing to make ends meet.
Three in four (76%) parents say that in addition to the emotional burden they face, their child's illness has resulted in a "major impact" on their family finances.
Parents and young people told the charity that they spent on average £367 and £277 respectively on cancer-related expenses every month, and with treatment lasting up to three years, the bills soon mounted up.
Three in five (58%) respondents to the survey said they had to reduce the number of hours they worked. A small but significant number (6%) of parents surveyed said they had turned to high interest, short-term payday loans to cope with the additional costs.
CLIC Sargent sought the views of 335 young people with cancer and parents or carers of children with cancer for its report Counting the Costs of Cancer.
It doesn't have to be like that, there are policies that will pay out on Childrens Critical Illness even if the parents are not covered for CI. For free advice on Childrens Critical Illness Cover
Tuesday 6 December 2011
Wednesday 23 November 2011
Absence 'increases workplace stress'
Bupa survey highlights impact on employees left 'holding the fort'
HR managers have told Bupa that staff absenteeism is putting extra stress on employees who are left to "hold the fort".
More than half (51%) of 100 HR managers surveyed by the insurer said that employee absenteeism increases workplace stress, with colleagues having to pick up the extra workload and take on extra overtime.
Just under half (44%) of all respondents said that (excluding private health insurance) their company does not have a workplace health programme such as absence case management in place for all employees.
A third (31%) reported a lack of awareness about what schemes are available while 22% said they were uncertain about where to focus resources to improve health within the organisation.
A quarter of respondents were unaware of the independent sickness absence review published yesterday, when surveyed earlier this month.
Commenting on the findings, Alex Perry, director of healthcare provisioning, Bupa said: "While while many companies know that there are potential benefits to investing in workplace health, one of the biggest barriers for employers is understanding how and where to invest in order to receive the most benefit."
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development's annual absence management survey shows that fewer than a third (30%) of employers evaluate the impact of their well-being spend, although this is an increase on 17% in the 2010 survey. Organisations that evaluate their well-being spend are twice as likely to have increased their spend this year.
For more information on workplace stress
HR managers have told Bupa that staff absenteeism is putting extra stress on employees who are left to "hold the fort".
More than half (51%) of 100 HR managers surveyed by the insurer said that employee absenteeism increases workplace stress, with colleagues having to pick up the extra workload and take on extra overtime.
Just under half (44%) of all respondents said that (excluding private health insurance) their company does not have a workplace health programme such as absence case management in place for all employees.
A third (31%) reported a lack of awareness about what schemes are available while 22% said they were uncertain about where to focus resources to improve health within the organisation.
A quarter of respondents were unaware of the independent sickness absence review published yesterday, when surveyed earlier this month.
Commenting on the findings, Alex Perry, director of healthcare provisioning, Bupa said: "While while many companies know that there are potential benefits to investing in workplace health, one of the biggest barriers for employers is understanding how and where to invest in order to receive the most benefit."
The Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development's annual absence management survey shows that fewer than a third (30%) of employers evaluate the impact of their well-being spend, although this is an increase on 17% in the 2010 survey. Organisations that evaluate their well-being spend are twice as likely to have increased their spend this year.
For more information on workplace stress
Monday 7 November 2011
£5 the most consumers will pay for Income Protection
Most have not experienced long-term sickness absence
Most people would not pay more than £5 a week for income protection (IP), suggests a new survey from the Association of British Insurers.
This month, the organisation's quarterly consumer survey focuses on absence from work and access to rehabilitation. The findings highlight the challenges facing the protection industry in a country where just 11% of the workforce is currently covered by IP.
While 89% of survey respondents said they would pay less than £5 a week for IP, 29% said they would not be prepared to pay anything at all.
This finding may be linked to the fact that most people have not experienced long-term sickness absence. Of the 1,658 people surveyed (all working at least eight hours a week), 82% had never been absent from work for more than three months as a result of sickness or injury. Fifteen per cent had been, or currently are, absent for this period of time, most of whom (77%) have received NHS treatment.
According to IP provider Unum, 11% of people have taken more than six months off work through illness or injury. Its Backup Plan consumer education campaign is alerting people to this fact, and warning that most employers will not pay absent employees beyond the statutory sick pay timeframe of 28 weeks. Forty per cent of ABI respondents thought that they would receive pay for six months or more if absent through sickness, whilst 26% were unsure.
The ABI survey suggests that employees who believe their employer is less generous with sick pay are more willing to pay more for IP, as are those earning higher salaries. Among those earning more than £40,000 a year, 31% were willing to pay over £5 a week for IP, compared to just 7% of those earning less than £20,000 a year.
Consumers may be able to purchase IP for £5 a week, if they accept a long deferral period.
Free quotation on income protection
Most people would not pay more than £5 a week for income protection (IP), suggests a new survey from the Association of British Insurers.
This month, the organisation's quarterly consumer survey focuses on absence from work and access to rehabilitation. The findings highlight the challenges facing the protection industry in a country where just 11% of the workforce is currently covered by IP.
While 89% of survey respondents said they would pay less than £5 a week for IP, 29% said they would not be prepared to pay anything at all.
This finding may be linked to the fact that most people have not experienced long-term sickness absence. Of the 1,658 people surveyed (all working at least eight hours a week), 82% had never been absent from work for more than three months as a result of sickness or injury. Fifteen per cent had been, or currently are, absent for this period of time, most of whom (77%) have received NHS treatment.
According to IP provider Unum, 11% of people have taken more than six months off work through illness or injury. Its Backup Plan consumer education campaign is alerting people to this fact, and warning that most employers will not pay absent employees beyond the statutory sick pay timeframe of 28 weeks. Forty per cent of ABI respondents thought that they would receive pay for six months or more if absent through sickness, whilst 26% were unsure.
The ABI survey suggests that employees who believe their employer is less generous with sick pay are more willing to pay more for IP, as are those earning higher salaries. Among those earning more than £40,000 a year, 31% were willing to pay over £5 a week for IP, compared to just 7% of those earning less than £20,000 a year.
Consumers may be able to purchase IP for £5 a week, if they accept a long deferral period.
Free quotation on income protection
Friday 4 November 2011
Stress a top cause of long-term absence
Problem is worse in the public sector
Further evidence has emerged that stress is a leading cause of long-term absence in UK workplaces.
Interviews with 500 employers commissioned by Group Risk Development (GRiD) found that almost one in six (15%) cited stress-related mental ill-health as the most common cause of long-term absence (defined as absence lasting longer than four weeks).
However, home and families issues are more commonly cited, by 20% of employers.
Research conducted by the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development (CIPD) earlier this year put stress at the top of a table of causes of long-term absence, for the first time in the organisation’s 12 years of polling employers.
Both the CIPD and GRiD have found that the problem of stress is worse in the public sector. GRiD found that 27% of public sector employers citing it as their main cause of absence compared with 13% in the private sector..
Katharine Moxham, spokesperson for GRiD, said: “Stress is often overlooked as a cause of long-term absence from work, compared to acute medical conditions such as heart attack or cancer. These figures prove just how big a problem absence through stress is for employers, and provide a timely reminder for businesses to take action over what is often a preventable condition.
“In times of increased economic pressure it is important for employers to consider firstly the wellbeing of their employees and what wider implications are suggested by high levels of stress or other mental illness, and secondly what provisions they have in place to ensure both the employee and the employer are adequately protected in case of long-term absence.”
For a free quote on income protection
Further evidence has emerged that stress is a leading cause of long-term absence in UK workplaces.
Interviews with 500 employers commissioned by Group Risk Development (GRiD) found that almost one in six (15%) cited stress-related mental ill-health as the most common cause of long-term absence (defined as absence lasting longer than four weeks).
However, home and families issues are more commonly cited, by 20% of employers.
Research conducted by the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development (CIPD) earlier this year put stress at the top of a table of causes of long-term absence, for the first time in the organisation’s 12 years of polling employers.
Both the CIPD and GRiD have found that the problem of stress is worse in the public sector. GRiD found that 27% of public sector employers citing it as their main cause of absence compared with 13% in the private sector..
Katharine Moxham, spokesperson for GRiD, said: “Stress is often overlooked as a cause of long-term absence from work, compared to acute medical conditions such as heart attack or cancer. These figures prove just how big a problem absence through stress is for employers, and provide a timely reminder for businesses to take action over what is often a preventable condition.
“In times of increased economic pressure it is important for employers to consider firstly the wellbeing of their employees and what wider implications are suggested by high levels of stress or other mental illness, and secondly what provisions they have in place to ensure both the employee and the employer are adequately protected in case of long-term absence.”
For a free quote on income protection
Monday 24 October 2011
Cancer patients 'anxious about money'
Patients using savings and borrowing to cope with financial impact of cancer
Cancer patients are struggling to make ends meet, suggests a new survey from Macmillan Cancer Support.
The charity's poll of 1,495 cancer patients found that more than two thirds (70%) had been affected financially by their diagnosis, through lost income and rising costs such as those incurred by travelling to hospital.
One in six (17%) of those financially affected said they had had to reduce spending on everyday items such as food, while 7% are scared of losing their home. Nearly a third (29%) of those financially affected have spent all or some of their savings, and nearly one in ten (9%) have borrowed money to cover the additional costs of cancer.
In total, more than two fifths (43%) are anxious as a result of their financial situation.
Macmillan is warning that the financial prospects of cancer patients may be worse under Government reforms. The Welfare Reform Bill, currently being scrutinised in the House of Lords, includes a proposal to limit the payment of employment support allowance (ESA) to one year, for those claimants allocated to the work-related activity group under work capability assessments. After 12 months these claimants will be means-tested and a claimant whose partner works more than 24 hours or earns £149 a week will lose all of their benefit. The charity argues that many people living with cancer will need longer than 12 months in order to return to work.
Under another proposal, cancer patients needing immediate financial help to cover extra costs following their diagnosis will have to wait six months instead of three to get the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which replaces Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
Ciarán Devane, chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "Cancer is an expensive disease to live with, but this research shows just how close to the breadline many cancer patients really are. While we understand the benefits system is in need of reform, certain changes in the Welfare Reform Bill could have catastrophic effects on many families who are already struggling. We know many Lords oppose these proposals and hope they support cancer patients as the Bill makes its way through Parliament."
Last year income protection provider Unum reported that claims from employees with cancer were up 44% over the course of the decade, resulting in a growing demand for tailored rehabilitation services. Cancer accounted for 19% of claims in 2009 and two-thirds of these claimants referred after more than six months of absence eventually returned to work.
For free quotation on Income Protection
Cancer patients are struggling to make ends meet, suggests a new survey from Macmillan Cancer Support.
The charity's poll of 1,495 cancer patients found that more than two thirds (70%) had been affected financially by their diagnosis, through lost income and rising costs such as those incurred by travelling to hospital.
One in six (17%) of those financially affected said they had had to reduce spending on everyday items such as food, while 7% are scared of losing their home. Nearly a third (29%) of those financially affected have spent all or some of their savings, and nearly one in ten (9%) have borrowed money to cover the additional costs of cancer.
In total, more than two fifths (43%) are anxious as a result of their financial situation.
Macmillan is warning that the financial prospects of cancer patients may be worse under Government reforms. The Welfare Reform Bill, currently being scrutinised in the House of Lords, includes a proposal to limit the payment of employment support allowance (ESA) to one year, for those claimants allocated to the work-related activity group under work capability assessments. After 12 months these claimants will be means-tested and a claimant whose partner works more than 24 hours or earns £149 a week will lose all of their benefit. The charity argues that many people living with cancer will need longer than 12 months in order to return to work.
Under another proposal, cancer patients needing immediate financial help to cover extra costs following their diagnosis will have to wait six months instead of three to get the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), which replaces Disability Living Allowance (DLA).
Ciarán Devane, chief executive of Macmillan Cancer Support, said: "Cancer is an expensive disease to live with, but this research shows just how close to the breadline many cancer patients really are. While we understand the benefits system is in need of reform, certain changes in the Welfare Reform Bill could have catastrophic effects on many families who are already struggling. We know many Lords oppose these proposals and hope they support cancer patients as the Bill makes its way through Parliament."
Last year income protection provider Unum reported that claims from employees with cancer were up 44% over the course of the decade, resulting in a growing demand for tailored rehabilitation services. Cancer accounted for 19% of claims in 2009 and two-thirds of these claimants referred after more than six months of absence eventually returned to work.
For free quotation on Income Protection
Tuesday 18 October 2011
Older women 'underestimate breast cancer risk'
Risk rises from one in 2,000 at 29 to one in 13 at 69
Elderly women are unaware that they are more at risk of developing breast cancer than younger women, according to a new survey.
Charity Breast Cancer campaign surveyed almost 500 women aged over 70 and found that less than 2% knew that their age group was at the greatest risk of the disease. They mistakenly believed that women aged 40-49 or 50-59 are at most at risk of breast cancer, which causes 12,000 deaths every year.
Increasing age is the biggest risk factor for breast cancer but the research also shows that women aged over 70 are less likely to check their breasts and to attend routine breast screening appointments than younger women. A separate poll of 520 women aged over 70, also conducted by Breast Cancer Campaign, found that only half (53%) were aware that they are not invited but are entitled to request an NHS routine screening appointment, with only 14% attending screening since turning 71.
Baroness Delyth Morgan, chief executive of Breast Cancer Campaign, said: "We read daily about different risk factors for breast cancer including alcohol and weight. While these are important, age is the most significant risk factor of all and yet women, including those most likely to be affected, remain in the dark about this."
A third of all breast cancer diagnoses in the UK occur in women aged 70 and over and 81% occur in women aged 50 and over. While the risk of developing breast cancer is just one in 2,000 at the age of 29 it rises to one in 13 by the age of 69 and the lifetime risk is one in eight.
Around half of all deaths from breast cancer every year are in women aged 70 and over. Research has also shown that older women are less likely to receive surgery after diagnosis with breast cancer.
For free quotation on Serious Illness Cover
Elderly women are unaware that they are more at risk of developing breast cancer than younger women, according to a new survey.
Charity Breast Cancer campaign surveyed almost 500 women aged over 70 and found that less than 2% knew that their age group was at the greatest risk of the disease. They mistakenly believed that women aged 40-49 or 50-59 are at most at risk of breast cancer, which causes 12,000 deaths every year.
Increasing age is the biggest risk factor for breast cancer but the research also shows that women aged over 70 are less likely to check their breasts and to attend routine breast screening appointments than younger women. A separate poll of 520 women aged over 70, also conducted by Breast Cancer Campaign, found that only half (53%) were aware that they are not invited but are entitled to request an NHS routine screening appointment, with only 14% attending screening since turning 71.
Baroness Delyth Morgan, chief executive of Breast Cancer Campaign, said: "We read daily about different risk factors for breast cancer including alcohol and weight. While these are important, age is the most significant risk factor of all and yet women, including those most likely to be affected, remain in the dark about this."
A third of all breast cancer diagnoses in the UK occur in women aged 70 and over and 81% occur in women aged 50 and over. While the risk of developing breast cancer is just one in 2,000 at the age of 29 it rises to one in 13 by the age of 69 and the lifetime risk is one in eight.
Around half of all deaths from breast cancer every year are in women aged 70 and over. Research has also shown that older women are less likely to receive surgery after diagnosis with breast cancer.
For free quotation on Serious Illness Cover
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)