Corrie star brandishes adult nappy to highlight ‘shameful’ cuts to disabled care

Coronation Street star Cherylee Houston brandished an incontinence pad as she dramatically hit out at Tory cuts.

The actress who plays headstrong factory machinist Izzy Armstrong shocked activists at Labour’s annual conference when she produced the “adult nappy” at the Real Britain fringe, hosted by the Mirror and the Unite union.

“Does anybody need the loo? Or did you all go before you came in?” she asked the packed meeting.

“Because they have come up with a solution; they are saying that we are to wear these,” she revealed, holding up the pants.

There were gasps of horror and some delegates wept as Cherrylee outlined the indignity suffered by those targeted.

Councils are being forced to slash support because of Government funding cuts.

And town halls are increasingly suggesting disabled people who are not incontinent use the pads to “give them more independence” said the TV star, who uses a wheelchair because she has the rare tissue disorder Ehlers Danlos Type III hypermobility type.”

Source: Coronation Street’s Cherylee Houston brandishes adult nappy to highlight ‘shameful’ cuts to disabled care – Mirror Online

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:

SWAHTprint SWAHTeBook

Related posts

16 Thoughts to “Corrie star brandishes adult nappy to highlight ‘shameful’ cuts to disabled care”

  1. Tweeted @melissacade68

  2. Brilliant!! Good for her. We need more and more to speak out.

  3. was it filmed? Good on her!!!! Exactly the publicity needed!!!!

  4. shaunt

    Clearly, a very brave and honourable person. It’s all too easy for those who have achieved ‘stardom’ to turn their backs on their former peers. I’m sure when the media pushed for more people with disabilities to be involved in TV productions they did not want this. However, disability is such a deeply emotional and life changing process it often binds its sufferers together through a common shared experience/humanity. I guess, somewhat similar to what often binds fellow cancer sufferers, those in the military who’ve been in active service or people who have experienced severe depression. Quite often you need to have suffered to really know (at least to better understand) what it is to be human; that is in the sense of not just knowing yourself, when things are going well. I hope this brave lady’s career does not suffer from her compassion and courage.
    shaunt

  5. random bloke

    Disgusting how little coverage this story has received… we’ll likely spend the rest of the year talking about “what Dave did” (lets be realistic, he did it, else he would happily sue for libel by now), or even Corbyn shagging Abbot.. meanwhile while the wool is pulled over the public’s eyes they go after the disabled again.unopposed

    1. Mike Sivier

      I wouldn’t say “unopposed”, if I were you. Not around here, anyway…

  6. random bloke

    Maybe not Mike but thats how many feel,

    I provide care for several relatives of varying age/level of disabilities, the most severe requiring 24/7 assistance/supervision. I also have health issues of my own. It is a slow physical and mental torture being forced to watch the health of people you love slowly worsen and having to explain why services which made their quality of life better in the slightest are being pulled out from under them.

    For example (since its relevant to the original article) incontinence services (pads) have been hit by cuts, suppliers trying to pass off unsuitable products like light/moderate incontinent pads to full/double incontinent users all in the name of saving money because its another service sold off.. they wouldn’t wear a product thats not fit for purpose so what makes them think their clients should? (nevermind the wider health implications, which go beyond simple “accidents”)

    1. Mike Sivier

      I am a carer, remember. I’m intimately aware of what it’s like to watch loved ones’ health worsen.
      My comment referred to the very specific work being done here to stand up for people with health problems. If you’re not aware of it, you’d better do some research before you put your foot in it again.

  7. Brian

    It takes examples of reality to persuade understanding in those who wish to deny the truth, if I may be forgiven the analogy ‘the preservation of the death camps’: The more those in a undeniably popularist position (celebrities count here) make these examples, the greater the influence. Well done Cherylee Houston. I have not seen this on the BBC, but as usual they may well have edited it out in their usual cult of denial.

  8. If more celebrities cared and/or spoke out against the tory agenda then they probably wouldn’t have gotten away with a lot of what they’ve done!

  9. Sue S

    I was confused by this from the last paragraph:
    …’town halls are increasingly suggesting disabled people who are not incontinent use the pads to “give them more independence”…’

    *Not* incontinent?

    (Please forgive my confusion, i’m not as sharp as i once was thanks to a stroke.)

    1. Sue S

      Sorry – is it because the ‘incontinence’ is purely down to not having a carer to take her to the loo?
      Argh, i wish i could delete these posts!

      1. Mike Sivier

        Yes, that’s the impression I had.

    2. Mike Sivier

      I think it means they have a little prior warning before they have to relieve themselves – but they may still need help to get to a toilet in time. The implication is that, with these pads, they don’t need that help and can just relieve themselves where they are.
      It’s an unpleasant prospect for me, sitting here writing about it – I’d hate to be someone who’s actually faced with the thought of being made to do it.

      1. What it means is that people with physical disabilities (eg who need hoisting or assistance to get on the loo) may not be incontinent as such. My daughter knows when she needs the loo but needs to tell her Carer so they can hoist her on to the loo. Unfortunately when out and about there are few hoists in toilets, therefore she has to pee into an incontinence pad. Also if their care is cut then there is no one to assist them to the loo.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this:

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. This includes scrolling or continued navigation. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close