Type 1, Female of 'that' age...

[NorthernRose]

Hi,
I was a member here a long time ago but had to re-join as my info had expired (computer said "No!").
Over 40 years with Type 1 (I was 6 yrs old) so now at that age when, as women will know, we get the short straw again. Trying to keep BG levels on course is impossible, but then it's our fault for being female. Guess this is the age at which we lose those years off the end of our lives, a couple more so than the male Type 1s.
But, having discovered that we are officially classed as having a 'hidden disability', I'd like to know why, in this age of later retirement, we can't claim our pensions earlier? Both State and private pensions are affected because (apparently) "we're all living longer"! Well I can't 'retire until I'm 68 (state pension), but statistics tell me my 'average life expectancy' is only 67.
Considering I had no choice over whether I got diabetes - I was severely UNDERweight when diagnosed and only just occupy the lowest level of 'normal' on the BMI scale - is it fair that the news only ever talks about Type 2 diabetes?
I find people assume diabetes is our fault - we ate too many sweets/puddings/sugary drinks when we were younger. Yes, Type 1s are in the minority. We don't cost the NHS 10%+ of its budget, yet we barely get a mention in the reports and documentaries.
I also lost my driving licence a few years ago - for 6 months, only it took 16 months to get it back thanks to those ambiguous questions the DVLA like to use. I know they got their knuckles rapped, but when you live in the middle of nowhere, trying to work when your licence could be lost at some point, is far from easy. Buses? Don't make me laugh.
So what can Type 1s do to promote greater public awareness? It seems to me we always get the short straw, and with Type 2 being in the news such a lot, does that mean we're relegated to the bottom of the lowest division?
Rosie

 

[Pumper_Sue]

But, having discovered that we are officially classed as having a 'hidden disability', I'd like to know why, in this age of later retirement, we can't claim our pensions earlier? Both State and private pensions are affected because (apparently) "we're all living longer"! Well I can't 'retire until I'm 68 (state pension), but statistics tell me my 'average life expectancy' is only 67.

Hi Rosie, no idea where you got the dying at 67 from but it's not true 🙂
My Uncle has been type1 for over 50 years and he's 81 in January 🙂 There are loads of type1's in their 70's/80's/90's.
You sound so angry with life in general which is a great shame. Life is what you make it though and yep if you fill in the DVLA forms wrongly then you can kiss goodbye to your driving licence and as you have found out it's takes a long time to get it back again.
Hope you feel better after your rant 🙂

 

[grovesy]

Welcome back!
I am not state retirement age yet , though before rule changes I would be.Though I was able to take my occupational one and others whom I have worked with and much younger than me have been able to o so even in the last year!

 

[Andy HB]

Welcome back to the forum. 🙂

Diabetes UK have done a lot to try and remind the media that there is more than one type of diabetes. The BBC especially seems to have got the message (finally) and usually has a paragraph or two specifying the differences whenever a diabetes story comes up.
Andy 🙂

 

[NorthernRose]

Hello,
Pumper Sue, you don't have to look very far for such info but here's one site: http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes-life-expectancy.html
And, having had to renew my driving licence every 3 years since 1988 I can assure you that it wasn't me who misunderstood the DVLAs ambiguously worded questions relating to hypos, frequency and whether or not a 3rd party had to assist. It was my then GP, plus a consultant who both got the same 2 answers wrong. I figured something was amiss so did a FOI request, then phoned both doctors. The GP apologised and promised to bring it to the attention of all in the practice (namely, "when DVLA say 'X', they mean 'Y'"). The consultant, being a non-native speaker of English, emailed DVLA immediately to put the record straight. So, when I completed the forms again, the 3rd time in 16 months, I got my licence reinstated.
This was back in 2010-2011, and I learned the DVLA had reworded their forms following this. But I also learned that I was lucky. Attending a Diabetes Awareness event I spoke with one woman who, like me, had lost her licence for a genuine reason (mine was a head injury) but then been denied it because of those old ambiguous questions. While doing battle to get her licence reinstated, she lost her job (no car meant no work), then her house (no work meant no cash for the mortgage) and finally her boyfriend quit the sorry saga!
Of all government organisations, the DVLA must qualify for the worst run. When PSV & HGV drivers can get away with lying to them for years while having a known history of blackouts, then cause the deaths of six innocent people in a few minutes (thanks to yet another blackout) it beggars belief that this licensing organisation is still able to operate legally.
Two sides of the same coin: tell them the truth, safe in the knowledge that you are allowed one hypo in a year that requires 3rd party assistance, as written in the DVLA small print - but you lose your licence, or lie to them for years about your medical history, kill several innocent bystanders and they'll still reinstate your licence (because you can't legally be held responsible for the deaths as you were unconscious at the time)!!! Er, I don't think that was the point. I think it was about being very consciously aware of lying when you filled in the forms yourself.
Anyway, rant over about DVLA (for now).
Andy, glad the BBC might be getting the odd message or two. But being north of the Border, most of us don't give them much air time. Can't say I'm too impressed with their order of importance on news programs - since when did a cookery program warrant greater attention than the plight of child refugees?
Heck, it's late. Still got tons to do.
Rosie 😎

 

[grovesy]

Hello,
Pumper Sue, you don't have to look very far for such info but here's one site: http://www.diabetes.co.uk/diabetes-life-expectancy.html
And, having had to renew my driving licence every 3 years since 1988 I can assure you that it wasn't me who misunderstood the DVLAs ambiguously worded questions relating to hypos, frequency and whether or not a 3rd party had to assist. It was my then GP, plus a consultant who both got the same 2 answers wrong. I figured something was amiss so did a FOI request, then phoned both doctors. The GP apologised and promised to bring it to the attention of all in the practice (namely, "when DVLA say 'X', they mean 'Y'"). The consultant, being a non-native speaker of English, emailed DVLA immediately to put the record straight. So, when I completed the forms again, the 3rd time in 16 months, I got my licence reinstated.
This was back in 2010-2011, and I learned the DVLA had reworded their forms following this. But I also learned that I was lucky. Attending a Diabetes Awareness event I spoke with one woman who, like me, had lost her licence for a genuine reason (mine was a head injury) but then been denied it because of those old ambiguous questions. While doing battle to get her licence reinstated, she lost her job (no car meant no work), then her house (no work meant no cash for the mortgage) and finally her boyfriend quit the sorry saga!
Of all government organisations, the DVLA must qualify for the worst run. When PSV & HGV drivers can get away with lying to them for years while having a known history of blackouts, then cause the deaths of six innocent people in a few minutes (thanks to yet another blackout) it beggars belief that this licensing organisation is still able to operate legally.
Two sides of the same coin: tell them the truth, safe in the knowledge that you are allowed one hypo in a year that requires 3rd party assistance, as written in the DVLA small print - but you lose your licence, or lie to them for years about your medical history, kill several innocent bystanders and they'll still reinstate your licence (because you can't legally be held responsible for the deaths as you were unconscious at the time)!!! Er, I don't think that was the point. I think it was about being very consciously aware of lying when you filled in the forms yourself.
Anyway, rant over about DVLA (for now).
Andy, glad the BBC might be getting the odd message or two. But being north of the Border, most of us don't give them much air time. Can't say I'm too impressed with their order of importance on news programs - since when did a cookery program warrant greater attention than the plight of child refugees?
Heck, it's late. Still got tons to do.
Rosie 😎

The BBC are highlighting DVLA medical shortcomings on the News today!

 

[trophywench]

The page that you have quoted the link to leads us to DUK saying that our life expectancy as you say, is 67 years as T1 ladies born prior to 1965 whereas those born later than 1965 can expect to live to 81.

They then go on to ask 'So what causes this expected reduction in lifespan?' - and the main reason is having too high blood glucose with the other reasons being the inevitable complications.

I have always maintained that if you don't have too high BG for too long then there's no reason for me to have diabetic complications that will shorten my lifespan. I can't claim to not have had any diabetic complications cos I have already had a couple - a really pesky frozen shoulder that certainly did last longer than the average Joe's and my cataracts did grow very quickly within a couple of years of the optician first noticing them so I've already had the worst one removed - but neither of those will cause my premature death!

I'm sorry if you have had too high BG for too long so have decided you are going to die sooner than you might have.

 

[Radders]

Weird that there's such a difference based on when you were born. I would have thought the more relevant date would be the date of diagnosis.
I think I was lucky in being diagnosed quite late (29) and going to a specialist clinic where I was put straight onto basal-bolus, while someone the same age as me who was diagnosed in childhood would probably have had a lot more years with no meter and using mixed insulins with worse control as a result.

 

[Mini-Vicki]

When I was (mis)diagnosed with T2 a few years ago at the age of 24, I was told by the doctor I could expect to live another 20 or so years. You can imagine the shock this was, at the same time as getting a diagnosis of an illness I didn't fully understand yet. This piece of 'advice' affected me in more ways than I understood at the time, and it's taken a fair few sessions with a diabetic psychologist to unpick the damage this did.
So now, I try not to focus on ambiguous life expectancies thrown around by various people. I may die at 67 from diabetic complications, or at 92 from a different disease, or in the meantime, I may get hit by a bus. Nothing is certain, and focusing on the age I may, or may not, die, is not going to help me in the slightest.
My amazing dad has had diabetes for over 50 years, and is in his 60s now. I hope he plans on sticking around for a lot longer 🙂

 

[Northerner]

I was diagnosed aged 49 and fully intend to collect my Nabarro 50 year medal from DUK, the year before I get my telegram from the Queen. I actually feel that I am healthier today than I was 10 years ago, in part due to the kick up the pants that my diagnosis gave me and the modifications I have made to keep diabetes in its place 🙂

 

[mikeyB]

I want to outlive Northerner.🙂

 

[Pumper_Sue]

I was diagnosed aged 49 and fully intend to collect my Nabarro 50 year medal from DUK, the year before I get my telegram from the Queen. I actually feel that I am healthier today than I was 10 years ago, in part due to the kick up the pants that my diagnosis gave me and the modifications I have made to keep diabetes in its place 🙂

Slight problem in your thinking.......DUK will not be giving out medals for having diabetes for 50 years, as so many now reach this milestone without a problem 🙂