To apply for DLA for DD when we have a household income of over 300k?

I think DLA should stay. But Access to Work is to help people access and stay in work. DLA is to do everyday living.

Figures from DWP, not the government.

Read this

https://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/number-new-pip-claimants-has-doubled-year

Is this sustainable?

The 3.2m claiming PIP isn’t correct. The Tories admitted as much. They counted twice the people who were still to be migrated onto PiP. And as per previous post, genuinely disabled people shouldn’t be paying the price for cuts. The whole system for assessing and awarding benefits is unfit for purpose and needs to be overhauled, but successive governments prefer to tinker at the edges.

While there are some working-age adults with DLA awards still, new claimants would not receive an indefinite DLA award. At most, it would be until transition to PIP.

If you start removing/taking certain benefits from the more well off, they start not wanting to pay tax. That’s why not all benefits are (rightly) means tested. Some benefits should be universal, so the tax system is fair. Obviously some remain means tested/for those in need but I’d say in this case you have a right to it

No where did I say disabled people were any less entitled to support.

Disabled people work and pay tax too. Why should they be any less entitled to the support that enables them to keep working ?

I like to lay the figures bare in these threads.

1.3 million parents claim DLA for a child. That’s 1 in every 13(ish). That’s more than 2 in every classroom.

3.2 million adults claim PIP. That’s 1 in 11.

Entitlement to either PIP or DLA is increasing by 300,000 every year and projected to rise.

Can any of you posters cheering a probable millionaire on to claim £80 a week look me in the eye and say this is remotely affordable?

That doesn't affect anyone else's claim, if the Op is successful in claiming DLA ,it will be because the decision makers feel that her daughters needs justify it ,that's not going ti affect little Jimmy,s claim even though he's from a less well of background, if he too meets the criteria,he will also get it
As several posters have pointed out David Cameron claimed it for his now sadly deceased son who was profoundly disabled.

@Rainbowsponge I’d have a lot more time for this argument if there was a basic level of provision available for kids with disabilities provided by the state. The fact is most parents of children with disabilities will be paying huge amounts for private provision of therapies and kit. State provision of basic therapies and education for disabled children is extremely limited. Raising a child with a disability costs on average three times as much as a typical child and the stats around of mothers in work is shocking (4% for full time work and 16% for any paid employment). The OP might be a high earner now but she’s beating the odds on this and if she’s anything like most mothers of disabled children that is not a secure feeling.

There’s a huge inequalities issue in this. It’s not driven by the OP.

And if the country is skint then blame the Tories for feathering their own nests and squandering taxes on vanity projects.

If you really want to solve the problem, firstly you have to stop subsidising employers to pay shit wages to their employees - the tax payer is effectively footing the bill for large corporations who are more interested in paying dividends to their shareholders and huge benefits to their execs than paying a decent wage to their employees.

Continue to curtail child benefit to two children and stop subsidising nursery fees. If people can’t afford to support their children they shouldn’t be having them. Stop landlords increasing their rents every time the rate of benefit goes up - in fact put a cap on how much rent they can charge to people claiming UC.

Then look at the absolutely massively unfit for purpose system of assessment for disability benefits and stop paying private companies bonuses for the crap assessments they’re turning out and put it back in the hands of doctors who actually know what they’re talking about and know the difference between a lead swinger and a genuinely disabled person. Finally stop awarding benefits for ‘health conditions’ which don’t attract regular cost. There is a massive difference between a health condition and a disability. Until the 1990s disability benefits could only be claimed by those who had a permanent substantial disability. Disabled people pay the price every single time there’s a round of benefit cuts. It’s time it stopped and we started to treat the sick, elderly and disabled with respect instead of making them jump through hoops and continually prove their entitlement when their conditions are never likely to change.

At the moment, but people are not built to be lifelong ‘parents’ and work. What happens if their daughter needs high care beyond the education years? What happens if they become incapacitated, elderly? Do you have any idea of the cost of sudden need of social care in comparison to being in the system for years? The cost of DLA and the small doors that opens to further support now is far less than suddenly expecting the state to fully fund an adult with additional needs who was previously unknown due to parents thinking they could ‘cope’.

I disagree - it is not immoral to claim disability benefits for a disabled child whatever your financial situation. It is for the child.

I claim it as I need it for proof of disability sometimes. I give the money to charity though as I earn a reasonable income. There is no way I would keep the money if on 300k. You can save money for your DC yourself.

Childcare is important though - it keeps parents working and in the long run they pay taxes. Someone needs to be paying taxes and currently we don't have enough tax revenue to fund the welfare bill ( or so we are led to believe)

And there will be less of it if OP claims.

216 replies and the OP hasn’t bothered their arse to come back to the thread.

People on here are literally obsessed with benefits and seem to think claiming them is a universal right and funded via some kind of moral fountain. It’s utterly bonkers and yet they’re the first to complain when cutbacks are made in other areas. We’re in serious shit because of our out of control welfare spending and the entitlement of the public that work or self sufficiency is very much optional.

Agreed. I mean can you imagine how much time it would cost to audit what someone spent on DLA and whether it was okay? It can include taxis, heating, clothes, therapy, special toys, special foods, extra washing of clothes, replacing broken household items, etc etc. It would be impossible, and very costly.

Having a child with a disability forces lots of parents (mums) out of work or having to work reduced hours to accommodate various appointments etc. loads of people use the DLA money as family money due to the reduced income.

They’re clearly not issues for everyone though are they. Trawl through MN threads on child benefit and nursery fees and the entitlement is breathtaking. Having children is a choice. Disability isn’t. Why is it ok to expect the state to pay child benefit for unlimited children and then cough up with free childcare places, but not support disabled children or adults ?

I honestly don't know how we can continue with the welfare bill increasing as fast as it is and people getting the amounts they do. It just doesn't seem sustainable. So many people claiming DLA/ PIP/ AA, even before the huge amounts of UC people have to claim to cover massive private rents etc. I do worry what would happen if we had a really major economic crash or got dragged into a world war.

Would you apply that reasoning to child benefit and free childcare ?

Except that this is absolute nonsense. No -one - and I do mean no-one audits what the money has been spent on. It’s for the extra costs of disability - that can mean anything and not all of it quantifiable.