Disability, health and carers

Headlines

  • The day to day activities of 13.5% of Surrey’s population are limited by a long term health problem or disability. This proportion is unchanged since 2001
  • The activities of 88,600 (5.7%) are limited “a lot”
  • 86% of Surrey residents are in good or very good health, with just 3.5% suffering bad or very bad health
  • 108,400 (9.6%) Surrey residents are providing unpaid to care to a friend or relative

Long term health problem or disability

The 2001 Census asked people whether they suffered from a “limiting long-term illness, health problem or disability which limits their daily activities or the work they can do, including problems that are due to old age.”

The wording in 2011 was slightly different:
“Are your day-to-day activities limited because of a health problem or disability which has lasted, or is expected to last, at least 12 months, include problems related to old age”

Respondents could choose “limited a little” or “limited a lot”

In 2011, 13.5% of residents reported a health problem, with 7.8% limited a little and 5.7% limited a lot. The overall proportion reporting a health problem was unchanged from 2001

The proportion of the population reporting a health problem is highest in Spelthorne (14.9%), Tandridge (14.8%) and Mole Valley (14.7%) and lowest in Elmbridge (12.1%).

Fewer Surrey residents reported a health problem than the national average. In England as a whole 17.6% reported a health problem with 9.3% limited a little and 8.3% limited a lot.

The likelihood of suffering from a long term illness or disability increases with age. 78% of people over 85 reported a health problem compared with just 2.9% of children under 16
Figure 1: Proportion of population reporting a health problem or disability by local authority

Source: Office for National Statistics
Table 1: Proportion of population reporting a health problem or disability by local authority

% with day-to-day activities limited a little % with day-to-day activities limited a lot All with activities limited
Surrey 7.8% 5.7% 13.5%
Elmbridge 7.0% 5.1% 12.1%
Epsom and Ewell 7.8% 5.6% 13.4%
Guildford 7.5% 5.2% 12.6%
Mole Valley 8.6% 6.1% 14.7%
Reigate and Banstead 7.9% 6.1% 14.0%
Runnymede 8.0% 5.9% 13.9%
Spelthorne 8.5% 6.4% 14.9%
Surrey Heath 7.4% 5.2% 12.6%
Tandridge 8.4% 6.4% 14.8%
Waverley 8.1% 5.7% 13.9%
Woking 7.5% 5.5% 13.0%
England 9.3% 8.3% 17.6%
South East 8.8% 6.9% 15.7%

Source: Office for National Statistics
Table 2: Proportion of population living in households reporting a health problem or disability by age 2011, Surrey

Age group Day-to-day activities limited a little Day-to-day activities limited a lot All with activities limited
0 to 15 1.8% 1.1% 2.9%
16 to 24 2.9% 1.5% 4.4%
25 to 64 5.7% 3.2% 8.9%
65 to 74 17.6% 8.9% 26.5%
75 to 84 30.2% 20.4% 50.6%
85+ 32.9% 45.1% 78.0%

Source: Office for National Statistics
Figure 2: Proportion of population living in households reporting a health problem or disability by age 2011, Surrey

Source: Office for National Statistics

General health

In the 2001 Census people were asked for an assessment of their

general health over the last year, choosing from Good, Fairly Good or Not Good.

The question and options changed in the 2011 Census to “How is your health in general”, with 5 options – Very Good, Good, Fair, Bad and Very Bad.

It is therefore difficult to compare the data with 2001.
86% of Surrey residents reported good or very good health with 3.5% reporting bad or very bad health. The healthiest borough is Elmbridge where 87.4% are in good or very good health and the least healthy is Spelthorne where 4.1% are in bad or very bad health.

The proportion of the population reporting bad or very bad health increased with age. 18.3% of people over 85 were in poor health compared with just 0.4% of children under 16.
Figure 3: General health by local authority

Source: Office for National Statistics
Table 3: General health by local authority

% in good or very good health % in bad or very bad health
Surrey 86.0% 3.5%
Elmbridge 87.4% 3.1%
Epsom and Ewell 86.0% 3.4%
Guildford 87.1% 3.2%
Mole Valley 85.2% 3.6%
Reigate and Banstead 85.6% 3.6%
Runnymede 85.4% 3.7%
Spelthorne 83.9% 4.1%
Surrey Heath 86.8% 3.2%
Tandridge 84.9% 3.8%
Waverley 86.2% 3.3%
Woking 86.4% 3.4%
England 81.4% 5.5%
South East 83.7% 4.3%

Source: Office for National Statistics
Figure 4: Proportion of population living in households reporting bad or very bad health by age 2011, Surrey

Source: Office for National Statistics

Carers

The Census asks people whether they give any help or support to family members, friends, neighbours or others because of long-term physical or mental ill-health or disability, or problems related to old age. The question was unchanged from 2001.
108,400 (9.6%) Surrey residents reported that they provide unpaid care. The proportion has changed little since 2001 when 9.4% were providing care. Most carers are providing less than 20 hours per week, but 11,000 are providing 20 to 49 hours per week and 18,500 are providing more than 50 hours per week.

Reflecting the population with long-term illness or disability, Mole Valley (10.4%), Spelthorne (10.3%) and Tandridge (10.3%) have the highest proportion of carers and Elmbridge (8.9%) the lowest.

Surrey has fewer carers than national average. In England as a whole, 10.2% of the population are providing care, with 2.4% providing more than 50 hours per week.

Older people are more likely to be providing unpaid care than younger people, and providing more hours of care. Nearly 14% of people aged 65 or over provide care with more than quarter of these providing 50 hours or more. Among young people under 25, less than 2% provide care, around one in 13 of these providing 50 hours or more.
Table 4: Population providing unpaid care by local authority

All people providing
unpaid care
Provides 1 to 19 hours
unpaid care a week
Provides 20 to 49 hours
unpaid care a week
Provides 50 or more hours
unpaid care a week
Surrey 108,433 9.6% 78,920 7.0% 11,039 1.0% 18,474 1.6%
Elmbridge 11,631 8.9% 8,653 6.6% 1,100 0.8% 1,878 1.4%
Epsom and Ewell 7,328 9.8% 5,294 7.1% 818 1.1% 1,216 1.6%
Guildford 12,576 9.2% 9,250 6.7% 1,215 0.9% 2,111 1.5%
Mole Valley 8,911 10.4% 6,731 7.9% 770 0.9% 1,410 1.7%
Reigate and Banstead 13,105 9.5% 9,401 6.8% 1,423 1.0% 2,281 1.7%
Runnymede 7,402 9.2% 5,208 6.5% 811 1.0% 1,383 1.7%
Spelthorne 9,844 10.3% 6,701 7.0% 1,150 1.2% 1,993 2.1%
Surrey Heath 7,894 9.2% 5,748 6.7% 823 1.0% 1,323 1.5%
Tandridge 8,535 10.3% 6,241 7.5% 852 1.0% 1,442 1.7%
Waverley 12,005 9.9% 9,031 7.4% 1,104 0.9% 1,870 1.5%
Woking 9,202 9.3% 6,662 6.7% 973 1.0% 1,567 1.6%
England 5,430,016 10.2% 3,452,636 6.5% 721,143 1.4% 1,256,237 2.4%
South East 847,353 9.8% 577,114 6.7% 96,883 1.1% 173,356 2.0%

Source: Office for National Statistics
Figure 5: Population providing unpaid care by local authority

Source: Office for National Statistics
Table 5: Population living in households providing unpaid care by age 2011, Surrey

Age group All people providing
unpaid care
Provides 1 to 19 hours
unpaid care a week
Provides 20 to 49 hours
unpaid care a week
Provides 50 or more hours
unpaid care a week
Age 0 to 24 6021 1.9% 4835 1.5% 715 0.2% 471 0.1%
Age 25 to 64 76054 12.7% 57862 9.7% 7622 1.3% 10570 1.8%
Age 65 and over 25754 13.9% 15768 8.5% 2630 1.4% 7356 4.0%

Source: Office for National Statistics
Figure 6: Population living in households providing unpaid care by age 2011, Surrey

Source: Office for National Statistics