Controversial use of benefit money?

[1Ivebeenthinking]

Imagine an autistic person, unemployed, very little to no prospects of employment (due to systematic failures). They will avoid eating and make themselves ill, but it’s not AFRID because they will eventually eat, just not enough or often enough, and eating foods they don’t like make them feel ill, and results in their behaviour and mood being worse.

They will willingly eat more expensive, quality foods that are deemed as luxury like fresh fish, steak and berries as the texture and taste doesn’t bother them like cheaper versions do.
Do you think this autistic person has a legitimate reason for using their benefits to pay for more expensive foods? Will they be judged for this because people in work can’t afford it?

It was definitely an ill thought out proposal. I sometimes wonder whether these people who think these things up, live in the real world, or know people who would be majorly affected by the decisions that they make.

I came on this thread thinking the person must be buying drugs with benefits money or something. They are buying food, how can that be controversial?

They are

I mean food is an essential to survive. If someone didn't work at all and then was taking foreign holidays abroad I'd be a bit annoyed. But food is NECESSARY.

As long as they don't deprive anyone else in the household who the money is also for, then it doesnt matter what they spend it on.

If someone was spending their money on drink/drugs/expensive food and their children werent getting basic needs met, then that would be totally wrong.

If the money is solely for that person then they should be able to spend it as they wish.

Yes, that's the whole point of it being money and not freebies.

Having a break abroad, could be necessary in a person's eyes, whether they work, or are on any benefit. It is not down to people to police what others spend their money on.

So it’s not ok for me to get respite at my parents because they live abroad then?

Got it.
Ill let my dh knows he isn’t entitled to a break.

when i was on benefits i got the yellow label reduced items so then if anyone did comment on the branded ones at least they were reduced

No one should have been commenting at all. Your benefit money can go on reduced stuff, or the full price premium brands. No one should care.

You can spend benefits on whatever you like. Spending more on food will mean less on other things. But it's entirely up to that person how to spend their limited budget

Did people comment on your shopping?

First of all, it's nobody else's business what food they are buying with their benefit money and second, buying decent fresh food is absolutely not a waste of money.

In fact, the whole point of DLA and now PIP is specifically to help disabled people and people with various conditions afford the extra things they may need to make managing their situation easier. That could be anything, like buying kitchen aids, or paying for help around the house, car modifications, or buying ready prepared veg/food if they find it difficult to chap & prep food. So, if someone finds certain foods are helping them, in whatever way, then yes, it's completely appropriate that they should spend their money on them.

I say this as someone who has been in receipt of DLA for a physical disability since DLA was introduced in the 1990s and who did actually work for the Benefits Agency (now DWP) at the time it was introduced, so I received training in it. Albeit that was a long time ago, but I believe the reasons behind its existence-to help people afford things that make life a little easier with their condition-remains the same.

not usually thankfully but it was more to avoid the type of comments to begin with, although when you mention money being tight you did get the odd comment of well have you considered budget brands etc (that was before they knew i got reduced)

in theory yes but many threads on mumsnet prove otherwise

I would think higher of them buying fish, berries and quality food than if they were buying branded shit food like heinz beans and walkers crisps.

Is the taxpayer paying for your holiday then? I know many people who work, can't afford to go abroad (don't even have passports) so just don't.

Here on the another hand. You need food to survive.

Can't afford to go abroad doesn't make sense. For low income people it's CHEAPER to go abroad than travel within the UK because of train prices.
And many people will already have a passport before they're on benefits.

Interesting to see RESPITE called a holiday.
Do you know what respite is?

It’s food, not a pack of cigarettes. Nobody should have an opinion on what you eat.

Again it is about personal choice. Why should it matter what brand of baked bean a person may want? They may economise in other areas to accommodate their choice, or need.

Why would you be annoyed? If people on benefits are going abroad they are obviously saving up to do so.

Our household income is a mix of private pensions and disability benefits. Are we allowed to holiday abroad?🤔

Oh no no no... we're all meant to jump and clap and celebrate, that someone who finds actual employment 'just too much 😟😟' is of course well enough to fly off to benidorm for 2 weeks in the sun... does their mood a world of good dontcha know, so of course anyone who isnt super happy for them is a big meanie who wants puppies to die!!

So that's pension, not someone claiming 'not able to work' benefits and swanning off on holiday!

No one is expecting people to be happy for them, or unhappy, or anything in between, I would have thought. I personally think that they should concentrate on their own lives.