Whole families on UC, PIP, DLA and carers' allowance for each other?

This is such a strange debate. There is no universal presumed frequency of admission for such a specific condition. I stated that it seldom happens, implying it's rare, you have argued with me all this time but when I suggested that you thought it was pretty common you take exception to that. So do you think it's rare too?

You did presume they had a disability. I stated that they were temperature sensitive in my opinion due to an ND trait. You then wrote:
So despite what you portrayed in your post, your in laws aren’t actually making a choice. If they can’t do something or need something because of their disability it isn’t a choice. That was the point I was making
They aren't disabled. Their choices are influenced by their limitations and traits as are everyone else's. The inability to accept that the concept of 'choice' is nuanced and often influenced by limitations is frustrating. Something can ostensibly appear to be a choice but actually there is something else driving it. This is true for people that are disabled and non disabled people. My sister was another example I used. She won't drive long distances because she feels so anxious doing this and feels unsafe. Is this a choice or a symptom of unusual anxiety? Anxiety is a normal part of the human condition but most people can drive long distances.

If a disabled person with an anxiety disorder stated that their PIP was used to pay for taxis as they couldn't drive far then I imagine you would view this differently than my sister's anxiety but can we be absolutely sure they are not the same thing? Some people just experience fewer traits and symptoms than others but the problem is widely prevalent in the population.

My overall point is that people are incurring extra costs for traits and symptoms outside of their control all the time. Some of these can be extremely costly and yet they won't qualify for PIP. The cost of the disability isn't assessed when awarding PIP. This leads to huge grey areas and incentives to lean into difficulties to make sure the claim is successful.

As I said, it isn’t as rare as you/people think. That was what I specifically said. Multiple times. Nothing more, nothing less. I stand by that. It isn’t as rare you/people think it is.

I presumed the person who had something that was “hugely impacting their decision making” has a disability. If that isn’t your in-laws then I’m not sure why your paragraph included them in the next sentence. It was like you were using them as an example.

As I said if someone can’t do something, it isn’t an active choice they are making. As I said, that applies whether they meet the definition of being disabled or not. It also applies whether they are in receipt of PIP or not. So, you imagine wrong.

Then don’t complain about people on benefits getting “the same” as your full time wage.

I can complain all I want! Most people would agree you should not be better off financially on benifits as there is no incentive to work! I am quite proud of what I have achieved despite my disability and when the time comes I need to be on benefits I do not think I should be getting the same as a full time professional worker to live on

I could waste energy getting angry at posts like yours, that pedal stupid, dangerous lies, but instead I just roll my eyes.

Has anyone remembered that pensioners are net benefit recipients yet ?

Can you give an example of someone who is “better off financially” than you who is on benefits compared to your full time wage?

I have throughout this post if you look back

Im not trailing through 22 pages I’m afraid.

If you know which page you posted your comparison breakdown I’ll gladly have a read.

@Palomiino the culture of families I mean; not genetic conditions, although you are right these are occasionally hereditary. They’re not at all the same thing.
People with genuine need should have all the support they require.
Op is talking about learned behaviours. These are generational and are passed down through families. The problem today is that some of the diagnostic criteria for some conditions potentially crosses over into learned behaviours; and so it’s not a medical condition or disability that is responsible for those behaviors. ADHD is a particularly strong example of this where some of the behaviors that can suggest ADHD are actually learned rather than as a result of actual ADHD. The diagnostic criteria is so large that the net is huge.
I don’t know if this has already been shared but there is some research that shows correlation between ‘chaotic’ home environments and ADHD behaviors in other settings for example.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9796059/

I don't think facts are any use here.

This is 2 examples

Thanks. But these are just second hand anecdotes though.

These aren’t full comparison breakdowns between your income and outgoings against the benefits and outgoings of these people supposedly “better off financially”.

Are you able to provide a full breakdown comparison to truly back up your claims?

There’s a benefit cap on the total amount of welfare a household can receive. Single parents, like the single mum you “know”, are capped at £1,835 a month (or £2,110 in London)
Claiming that a single mum receives £2,400 in benefits without a sever disability exemption is impossible under the DWP rules.

Also PIP isn’t means tested, it’s awarded and based on sever physical and mental limitation supported by comprehensive medical evidence. It is not awarded for personal preferences such as “disliking touching food”.

Regarding your cousin, “not needing to pay council tax or rent”, you are aware that UC includes the ‘housing element’ meant to cover rent. If your cousin gets Hugh monthly totals then that figure already includes their rent money which is immediately paid out to their landlord or council. It isn’t kept as disposable income “for more weed and takeaways”. Council tax reduction is a localised reduction not a cash payment.

You also seem to not include the fact that full time workers in a professional role (yourself) retain long term earning potential, pension contribution, career progression and access to tax free allowances that state benefits don’t offer. You don’t explain how your job security means that YOU are actually financially better off than people on benefits for ailments.

Anecdotes and stories are not proof.

Ever heard of urban legends?

So you are only talking about ADHD?

And the thing about ADHD is that it’s 1 genetic and 2 untidiness is a symptom so arguably it’s not the chaos that causes the ADHD,it’s the ADHD that causes the chaos…

What a strange thread.
No one has any answers, just wanting to argue with others.
I'm out.

Surely the discussion about the increase in the benefits bill, because no one can say that the numbers of people claiming sick benefits and universal credit has increased exponentially over the past decade.

It is unsustainable to keep the projected increase at the same level of benefit income.

So what should be done? How do you address this as a bulk economic problem? It’s impossible to govern by individual cases.

The pension part of the welfare bill can be partly addressed by increasing the pension age, freezing pension credit levels and letting the standard state pension catch up so effectively you phase out pension credit and cut off a year from claiming.

What are the options to fairly reduce the other half of the welfare bill. These are the decisions that need to be made. Do you reduce the amount each claimant gets but allow all who need to claim? Do you tighten up the criteria for sickness and disability?

Too many people just don’t want to work. Why would they? Their benefits pay enough why bother with the stress and constrictions of a minimal wage job?

No one would go to work for more stress and less money than you are given for not going to work. If you can feign symptoms and conditions to prevent being made to work you are going to do it. And to think that many people don’t play the system is naive. It might not be your household but those chancers, the ones who exaggerate and know they aren’t as disabled as they can make out, why are there videos telling people what to write to get payouts? The system can be played. And these chancers could be the reason that the whole benefits system comes crashing down and becomes much less generous for those in genuine need.

Whether it’s true or not, there are videos of people flaunting their benefit lifestyle online. And people believe them. It doesn’t take much to push people to vote for politicians who say they will get rid of these claimants flaunting their day shopping whilst you have been out in the winter weather putting in a 10 hour shift.

It won’t be good for anyone.

Look it up what the benifits are! I see this constantly in my work and have numerous family members and people I know. What do you not agree with? That’s how much people on benifits get, you can find out for yourself, why on earth would I make it up?
again for the 20th time I am not against benifits but think it’s shouldn’t be the same as working full time

Not really no! A person (for example) with severe mental health issues might be capable of the physical tasks that a person say in a wheelchair might require, but struggle with things like phone calls, financial management social interactions, memory loss etc which the partner in the wheelchair might take on! So two people with different needs can be carers and also people in need of care

But why as a couple, who are presumably both already on PIP, do they need carers allowance for one another?

They already get PIP as they can’t work, and would presumably look after one another as a couple, so why do we need to pay them more?

You can't live on maximum PIP, and you're not meant to. PIP is meant to pay for the extra living expenses of being disabled.

It isn’t just about the money, PIP doesn’t pay NI credits, CA does.

PIP isn’t because they can’t work. It is a disability benefit, not an out of work benefit.

I know a couple in that position. They have very different issues.
One has no energy due to a very long list of illnesses so her DP does all the cooking etc…
Her DP has huge issues with anxiety so can’t go out alone etc… she supports him in doing that.

If someone is out of work, then their NI credits are paid via UC in any case, the CA doesnt need to fulfil this role

If someone is in work then their NI credits are dealt with via that way.

If you're disabled I can't blame them. I also can't blame someone who is caring for disabled children. Some health issues can be managed, but there are some that can't be powered out off. I think it MND, cancer, CFS etc.

But I only think to myself where OP has health issues, so does her DH. And they produce not one, not two but three DCs who are ALL disabled.

I also think to myself many MNers heavily disapprove of cousin marriages don't they? Due to the issues with the kids and the cost to the taxpayer with their care.