01.08.2013 Views

View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

View/Open - University of Zululand Institutional Repository

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

5.5.8 ITEM' 19 RESPONDENTS WHO MANAGEDTO WORK AFTER<br />

AMPUTATION TO ADD TO THE DISABILITY GRANT<br />

AND THOSE WHO DID NOT WORK AFTER<br />

AMPUTATION<br />

FlGURES5 BESPONDENTSWBOWORKED ORNOIWORKED AFfERAMPUrATION<br />

BRespondenls<br />

who did notWDIlt<br />

after amputation<br />

E1Respondenls<br />

who managedto<br />

WOIkafler<br />

amputation<br />

Figure 5.5 indicates that (15) 60% respondents did not work after amputation as<br />

compared to (10) 40% who managed to work after amputation, This does not mean that<br />

(10) 40% amputees returned to their old work after amputation, but that some did light<br />

duties on their own like repairing shoes, handwork like bead work to get an income to<br />

addto the disability grant, except for those who were self-employed and who returnedto<br />

their old employment. This indicates that thereis a great need <strong>of</strong>proper rehabilitation so<br />

thatpeoplearesupportedand prepared to go back to their old work.<br />

This also reveals that there is a need for family and community involvement to start mini<br />

projects in the community where all physically challenged people can get involved so as<br />

to add to their disability grants. However, financial support becomes a problem to start<br />

these projects. NdIovn (2000) supports this statement that there is a great needto make<br />

58

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!