Recently we shared a list of CC to help spread body positivity in the Sims 4, and we wanted to expand on that concept for disabled sims and simmers. Just as everyone should be able to love their body regardless of how it looks, everyone should be able to love their body regardless of what it can or cannot do. We have gathered a list of Sims 4 disabilities CC with the hope that more players can see themselves represented in their games.
A nasal cannula for sims aged teen and up who require a bit of extra oxygen in their day-to-day. The original post is gone but archived in the Wayback Machine and the accessory item can be downloaded here.
This is a small collection of bandages, braces, tubes, and other accessories for sims of all genders aged teen and up. The head bandage requires City Living to work. Read the details and download the set here.
A collection of poses that highlight the steps a wheelchair-using sim would go through when transferring from their chair to a sofa or bed. There are 6 poses duplicated between sofas and beds, plus a single starting pose when your sims begins to transfer, which you can download here.
The world is a diverse place full of individuals with varying abilities & disabilities. Using CC from the amazing modding community, you can bring some of that diversity into your own games by giving disabled sims some representation. We hope this collection of Sims 4 disabilities CC fills the need of disabled simmers, at least until we see disabilities integrated into the core mechanics of the Sims 4 or its successors. Enjoy and happy simming!
Oh yeah, the person that paywalled the disability cc posted this, removed all replies/reblogs from it and blocked me just for this response so I guess I'll post this again myself before it gets deleted completely.
Sims with a disability; Not available in the game, yet something to think about for the future. For a lot of people it is the reality of their daily lives, but a life simulator as big as The Sims has never really touched upon this topic. We think this should change!
Pursuant to Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and other nondiscrimination laws and authorities, ADES does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. Persons that require a reasonable modification based on language or disability should submit a request as early as possible to ensure the State has an opportunity to address the modification. The process for requesting a reasonable modification can be found at Equal Opportunity and Reasonable Modification.
Bella!! I'm so excited for the forearm crutches poses and the disability cc in general ? I don't know if you'd have any interest in making them, but the same person who you originally got inspiration from for the poses has a video of them doing sitting poses as well, that would be cool to see! I hope you have a lovely day ???
Table of Contents » Title 8.01. Civil Remedies and Procedure » Chapter 16. Compromises » § 8.01-424. Approval of compromises on behalf of persons under a disability in suits or actions to which they are parties
A. In any action or suit wherein a person under a disability is a party, the court in which the matter is pending shall have the power to approve and confirm a compromise of the matters in controversy on behalf of such party, including claims under the provisions of any liability insurance policy, if such compromise is deemed to be to the interest of the party. Any order or decree approving and confirming the compromise shall be binding upon such party, except that the same may be set aside for fraud.
B. In case of damage to the person or property of a person under a disability, caused by the wrongful act, neglect, or default of any person, when death did not ensue therefrom, any person or insurer interested in compromise of any claim for such damages, including any claim under the provisions of any liability insurance policy, may, upon motion to the court in which the action is pending for the recovery of damages on account of such injury, or if no such action is pending, then to any circuit court, move the court to approve the compromise. The court shall require the movant to give reasonable notice of such motion to all parties and to any person found by the court to be interested in the compromise.
5. Where the agreement of settlement provides for payments to be made over a period of time in the future, whether such payments are lump sum, periodic, or a combination of both, the court shall approve the settlement only if it finds that all payments which are due to be made are (i) secured by a bond issued by an insurance company authorized to write such bonds in this Commonwealth or (ii) to be made or irrevocably guaranteed by an insurance company or companies authorized to do business in this Commonwealth and rated "A plus" (A+) or better by Best's Insurance Reports. Payments made under this subdivision totaling not more than $4,000 in any calendar year may be paid in accordance with § 8.01-606. Payments made under this subdivision totaling more than $4,000 in any calendar year while the recipient is under a disability shall be paid to a duly qualified fiduciary after due inquiry as to adequacy of the bond of such fiduciary.
Because multiple sclerosis (MS) is a chronic disease causing disability over decades, it is crucial to know if the short-term effects of disease-modifying therapies reported in randomised controlled trials reduce long-term disability. This 10-year prospective observational study of disability outcomes (Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) and utility) was set up, in conjunction with a risk-sharing agreement between payers and producers, to investigate this issue.
This study supports a beneficial effect on long-term disability with first-line MS disease-modifying treatments, which is clinically meaningful. However the waning effect noted requires further study.
Multiple sclerosis (MS) is a major cause of serious physical disability in adults of working age. The majority of patients start with a relapsing remitting phase (RRMS), which then becomes secondary progressive (SPMS) with or without superimposed relapses at a median disease duration of 20 years.1 It is during this latter phase that the majority of the disability is manifest.
A key feature of the scheme was the monitoring of disability progression in a cohort of patients to test whether observed outcomes were in line with those required for cost-effectiveness. This observational study recruited over 5000 UK patients prescribed the interferon-βs and glatiramer acetate between 2002 and 2005 and followed them up over a 10-year period in order to measure the long-term effectiveness of the drugs when compared with a modelled natural history cohort. Two yearly analyses were performed and if observed outcomes deviated from target by more than an agreed margin, the price of the drugs would be adjusted to restore cost-effectiveness.
At 2 years the initial Ontario natural history data set was deemed not suitable to model the untreated control group because the disability scores had been smoothed,11 and the British Columbia MS database was selected and validated.12 13 A second independent analysis model (a multilevel model (MLM)) was added14 to corroborate results from the Markov model specified in the RSS.15
After 6 years of follow-up,13 the drugs in aggregate showed a 40% reduction in the rate of deterioration in disability on the MLM in patients with relapsing remitting disease (24% on the Markov model); this translated into a reduction of 43% (multilevel) or 42% (Markov) in the rate at which utility worsened, which was on track for the cost-effective target.10
The scientific analysis plan for this 10-year analysis16 was further revised in line with intention-to-treat principles, with additional analyses of (1) subgroups, (2) the influence of time on treatment effectiveness and (3) the effect of treatment on the time to loss of unaided ambulation. Here we report the final results of this study, focusing on the longer term effect of DMTs on disability progression.
The primary outcomes are shown in table 1. The absolute 10-year treatment effect was a reduction of 0.61 using the MLM (95% CIs 0.55 to 0.66) and of 0.12 in mean EDSS using the Markov model (95% CIs 0.07 to 0.17). The corresponding relative reduction in progression was 28% (95% CIs 26% to 31%) for the MLM and 7% (95% CIs 4% to 10%) for the Markov model. However, using the time-varying Markov model, the effect size closely mirrors the MLM results (see below). In utility terms, the reduction in progression was 23% (95% CIs 20% to 26%) on the MLM and 24% (95% CIs 21% to 27%) on the Markov model. Figure 2A,B shows how the observed disability progression deviates over the 10-year period from that expected for untreated patients (the comparator control group) for the MLM.
Comparison against control results using the MLM model: disability outcomes over 10 years in RSS patients and in the untreated comparator control group, for the whole cohort (A) EDSS progression and (B) utility progression, and for the patients with RRMS at baseline (C) EDSS progression and (D) utility progression. EDSS, Expanded Disability Status Scale; MLM, multilevel model; RRMS, relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis; RSS, risk-sharing scheme.
Other methodological issues worth considering are the use of the EDSS as the main outcome measure and the requirements for the EDSS scoring. Although the EDSS is not sensitive to change over the shortterm and focuses on mobility, it is the most widely used and accepted measure of disability in MS. Using this measure also allows us to convert the outcome to quality of life measures for cost-effectiveness calculations and to assess whether our results are plausible by comparing the results with other studies. The clinicians in our study did not undergo formal EDSS training as is required in clinical trials, rather the EDSS was collected within the routine clinical setting. Sites were instructed to use the same clinician to perform the EDSS over time where possible, and it was performed mainly by neurologists with expertise in MS. This was similar to the way the British Columbia natural history data set EDSS measurements were performed and thus comparable. The interobserver variability in our study was previously reported31 to have a kappa value of 0.59, 0.71 and 0.85: for full agreement, within 0.5 and within 1.0 EDSS scores, respectively, and it is expected that the intraobserver variability is even better. 2b1af7f3a8