'4th March 1950.

Disabled Person's (Employment) Act, 1944. Paraplegics (MLCC.139. Para.2354)

Mr. Albert E. Hamilton. 262, Willesden Lane, London. N.W.2.

The attached D.P.1. is forwarded for your continued action under the provisions of Section XXIV of MLCC.139. The reports that are to be rendered monthly by you to this office in respect of these cases are being followed closely by the Disabled Persons Branch who atr attaching great importance to the instructions laid down in this Section of the circular. Will you therefore, please ensure that the fullest details of any progress made in this case are embodied in your first report which should reach this office not later than 18th March.

This patient who was due to be discharged to his home on 3rd March is the victim of  bomb blast resulting in complete paralysis of both legs. The accident occurred on October, 1940 since when he has been in and out of various hospitals, for the last four years he has been receiving treatment at Stoke Mandeville Hospital, Aylesbury and, although he has done no work for the past nine years, the doctors have now declared him fit to undertake any suitable work.

During his stay in various hospitals the man has learned to do light leather work but he does not feel that employment in this line will be sufficiently renumerative and would like some form of interesting factory work. He stresses that he would not like a monotonous job such as repetition work on the endless belt system.

He did suggest that he would like to get a job as a private Chauffeur but for your information the doctor has since been contacted and he is definitely opposed to this type of work owing to the possible danger to the patient in an emergency (it will be noticed that this man wears a rubber urinal).

Owing to the difficulty of transport at the moment Mr. Hambleton would appreciate it, if arrangeemnt could be made for your D.R.O. to visit him at his home to discuss the prospects of employment.'

RESETTLEMENT OF PARAPLEGIC.

Mr. A.E. Hambledon,

262, Willesden Lane, N.W.2.

On receipt of your first minute of 7th March, Mr. Hambledon was visited at his home the next day. He was assisted from the garden by a young man who pushed him in his wheel chair up a ramp and into the living room. It is very clear that Mr. Hambledon has little chance of ever being employed outside his home. Even there he admits getting tired when seated in his invalid chair and has to be assisted into bed to rest his back. While I was with him he drank water frequently from a jug and explained that copious drinking was necessary to keep his kidneys working.

Home working of some kind is the need here. I made arrangements for a firm's representative to call and see Mr. Hambledon, but he did not go and an enquiry I made to the firm revealed that materials scarcity was given as the reason.

Mr. Hambledon has been in touch with the British Red Cross Society with a view to getting assistance towards the purchase of welding equipment. I arranged for the district T.O. to visit him to give him any assistance required in the way of advice and information on likely employers who he (Mr. Hambledon) might contact for work. A copy of the T.Os. report is enclosed.

Mr. Hambledon is not one of the eligible categories for a resettlement grant but it is possible that an exception would be made in his case, if he provided evidence that work was available and that he could do it.

He has twice called at the Exchange in connection with the proposed welding work and is to call again when he has further explored its possibilities.'