Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

1 2 3 4

AIBU?

Drug testing benefits claimants?

98 replies

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:21

I've just been reading the opinions on another forum about testing benefits claimants for illegal substances. The suggestion is that ALL taxpayer funded benefits, including DLA, PIP, Tax credits and so on, should be subject to urine sample testing.

I can't believe the amount of support for it.

AIBU to find the prospect chilling?

OP posts:

Report

PerryHatter · 09/03/2016 13:29

YANBU.

Disturbing. I don't like the assumption that if you claim benefits, you probably take drugs. All that free time and money, clearly

waffilyversati1e · 09/03/2016 13:30

presumably we will be urine testing MP's too? Bankers?

megletthesecond · 09/03/2016 13:30

Yanbu.

What would they hope to achieve? Take their benefits away following a positive test? Surely crime would rocket.

megletthesecond · 09/03/2016 13:31

waff the city would be half empty!

KingJoffreyLikesJaffaCakes · 09/03/2016 13:33

Won't that cost mahoosive amounts of money?

DawnOfTheDoggers · 09/03/2016 13:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:33

Apart from the obvious impracticality and cost, the thought of people exchanging a sample bottle for their money is awful

OP posts:

feellikeahugefailure · 09/03/2016 13:33

YANBU.

Drug test anyone in the city that has benefited from public money (everyone), every mp and house of lords member.

Take hair samples today.

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:34

Yes, the suggestion is that we would save so much money by sanctioning that the welfare bill would wither away to nothing.

OP posts:

CrohnicallyAspie · 09/03/2016 13:35

My SIL is on benefits and takes drugs... morphine, steroids, benzodiazepines... I presume there will be an exception for prescribed drugs!

Actually, what about alcohol, nicotine? What if someone's overweight, I mean, clearly they have too much money if they can afford to buy enough food to be fat?!

Ridiculous idea!

PausingFlatly · 09/03/2016 13:37

Nice piece of circus to keep the citizenry fighting among ourselves.

And a nice little earner for whichever of Serco or G4S gets the contract.

Bit of a downer for the actual citizens, though. Paying for it, having privacy invaded - and to achieve what, exactly?

Mind you, they'd never publish the actual results; surveys show the public massively overestimate the number of people on benefits who are alcohol or substance abusers. And neither IDS nor the Wail-alikes would want to undermine one of their favourite myths.

hownottofuckup · 09/03/2016 13:37

What a weird idea.
YANBU there are a lot of ideas on MN at the mo I find disturbing.

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:39

It's already been done in the U.S. thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/02/26/3624447/tanf-drug-testing-states/

OP posts:

SchnooSchnoo · 09/03/2016 13:39

It's a fucking stupid idea. It just makes no sense. Yes, there is a proportion of benefit claimants that use drugs, as there is in every other walk of life. Some of them presumably can't work because they are drug addicts. What do they suppose should happen to them?

I second the idea that mp's and bankers should be routinely tested. If drug users aren't fit to claim benefits then they certainly aren't fit to run the country, or the economy!

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:41

Beats me how you could fund a drug habit on benefits anyway.

OP posts:

DropYourSword · 09/03/2016 13:41

Not sure whether I agree or not. The thing is, a lot of companies do random drug testing on their employers (at least here in Australia they do) so I don't see why there should be an uproar about this. It doesn't imply that everyone on benefits is taking drugs. But then what would be the consequences of failing a test. It could also be pretty easy to cheat if people carried a 'clean sample' on them!

manicinsomniac · 09/03/2016 13:44

Wtf??

That's insane.

Apart from the ethics and judginess of it, I don't even understand what they want to achieve. Since when were drugs the preserve of the needy? I always use that meme joke with my older classes at school

'remember kids. If a stranger offers you drugs, always say thank you - because drugs are expensive!'

They'd be better off urine testing affluent school leavers/university graduates before granting them their high paying jobs. (I KNOW most won't be on drugs, btw, I'm not trying to be a reverse snob or whatever it is. But I wouldn't be surprised if the percentage who are is higher than that of benefit claimants.)

PausingFlatly · 09/03/2016 13:51

Companies do random drug-testing for fear of what employees may do while under the influence - for which the company is liable.

Not just for the hell of it.

madein1995 · 09/03/2016 13:52

YANBU

Just because someone is claiming benefits, does not mean they are taking drugs. And if someone is taking drugs, they need support not a removal of money. This makes me so angry, it's stereotyping benefit clamaints - almost like saying 'we think all people on benefits take drugs so you have to prove you're not'. It's stereotyping, it's allowing the daily mail type people to justify their judgements/opinions and probably makes the individuals going through the testing, to feel ashamed and embarrassed. In fact, it may well lead to people not accepting benefits because of the stigma - if they need to do a drug test to get their money, then people may well feel others assume they're addicts because they're on drugs.

It really does seem like criminalising addicts to me. Because people who work for the governments money (MP's/those who work for the council etc) aren't routinely drug tested are they? It's only the feckless, unemployed, scroungers (being sarcastic btw) who don't work for their money who are drug tested. This puts a stigma on recieving benefits, and a lot of people on them will feel ashamed. People on benefits are still people, and should have the same rights as everyone else. This stinks of the notion of 'deserving' and 'undeserving' poor and I thought that was left in the last century. If the government do this then it is disgraceful and I wouldn't be surprised if those in need stopped claiming benefits because of it.

CremeEggThief · 09/03/2016 13:52

Ridiculous. YANBU.

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:53

Drop I think the outrage is because of the degrading nature of it.

OP posts:

UnmentionedElephantDildo · 09/03/2016 13:53

Who is talking about this for any part of UK?

madein1995 · 09/03/2016 13:54

I meant

*assuming they're addicts because they're on benefits

*criminalising claimants

LuisSuarezTeeth · 09/03/2016 13:57

Another forum Unmentioned

Doing a similar thing to the trials in the USA (see my link above)

OP posts:

PausingFlatly · 09/03/2016 13:58

I'm more than happy to make clear what a stupid idea this is, whoever may be talking about it.

Even if it's just randoms on websites without astroturfers.

Wouldn't want IDS to get ideas...

Flip

1 2 3 4

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.