do you think this should continue?
I think focusing solely on benefits or making benefits the prime focus even if also looking at other elements wildly misses the point. It also fails to take into account many NEETs do not claim UC or the fact that if they weren’t claiming in their own right, some would be on their parent’s UC claim.
It is contradictory to pay benefits to 16-18 year olds who are not in education or training when the ones who are in education and training do not receive benefits (apart from the sixth form bursary).
As I said, you are wrong. Some 16-18 year olds in full-time education can and do receive UC themselves. And I am not talking about being on their parents’ claim. I mean they, or their appointee on their behalf, claiming it their own name.
I am not sure why young people with autism, ADHD or mental health issues require extra money.
Then you haven’t got a clue as to how disabling ASD, ADHD and anxiety can be. Nor the associated costs. Having ASD, ADHD and anxiety can be very expensive.
I think in this age bracket, parents should be paying to support their children.
And what happens if parents can’t? Or can’t if their children is no longer a QYP on their UC claim? And it isn’t an either or. For many disabled people, benefits do not cover the additional disability related expenses and parents help towards those costs as well.
Young people 18-24 with autism, ADHD or mental health issues should be asked to do voluntary work for their money after 3-6 months. Physically disabled people should also be encouraged, if they have the capability. What is wrong with that?
What is wrong with it is that it is far too simplistic. Who will facilitate and support the person? Access to Work isn’t available for voluntary positions and for paid positions cuts to the scheme have been made. What about those claimants who can’t do voluntary work on top of being in full-time education? Even more would be in full-time education if LAs didn’t act unlawfully. What about those with ASD, ADHD or mental health issues who can’t? Why do you say physically disabled people should be encouraged if they have the capability but those with other disabilities don’t have the same caveat.
We need to have stricter fitness to work assessments.
Those with LCW, which was the group your pp that I responded to was about, are expected to prepare for work. That may include volunteering now where it is deemed appropriate. It will depend on the individual case and their claim commitments.
No work requirements only comes with LCWRA. In order to be in this group you have to meet one of the following:
Mobilising unaided by another person with or without a walking stick, manual wheelchair or other aid if such aid can reasonably be used
Cannot either:
(a) mobilise more than 50 metres on level ground without stopping in order to
avoid significant discomfort or exhaustion; or
(b) repeatedly mobilise 50 metres within a reasonable timescale because of
significant discomfort or exhaustion.
Transferring from one seated position to another
Cannot move between one seated position and another seated position located
next to one another without receiving physical assistance from another person.
Reaching
Cannot raise either arm as if to put something in the top pocket of a coat or
jacket.
Picking up and moving or transferring by the use of the upper body and arms
Cannot pick up and move a 0.5 litre carton full of liquid.
Manual dexterity
Cannot either:
(a) press a button, such as a telephone keypad; or
(b) turn the pages of a book with either hand.
Making self understood through speaking, writing, typing, or other means normally used
Cannot convey a simple message, such as the presence of a hazard.
Understanding communication by hearing, lip reading, reading 16 point print or using any aid if reasonably used
Cannot understand a simple message due to sensory impairment, such as the location of a fire escape.
Absence or loss of control over extensive evacuation of the bowel and/or voiding of the bladder, other than enuresis, despite the presence of any aids or adaptations normally used
At least once a week experiences:
(a) loss of control leading to extensive evacuation of the bowel and/or voiding of the bladder; or
(b) substantial leakage of the contents of a collecting device sufficient to require the individual to clean themselves and change clothing.
Learning tasks
Cannot learn how to complete a simple task, such as setting an alarm clock, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder.
Awareness of hazard
Reduced awareness of everyday hazards, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder, leads to a significant risk of:
(a) injury to self or others; or
(b) damage to property or possessions such that they require supervision for the majority of the time to maintain safety.
Initiating and completing personal action (which means planning, organisation, problem solving, prioritising or switching tasks)
Cannot, due to impaired mental function, reliably initiate or complete at least two sequential personal actions.
Coping with change
Cannot cope with any change, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder, to the extent that day to day life cannot be managed.
Coping with social engagement, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder
Engagement in social contact is always precluded due to difficulty relating to others or significant distress experienced by the individual.
Appropriateness of behaviour with other people, due to cognitive impairment or mental disorder
Has, on a daily basis, uncontrollable episodes of aggressive or disinhibited behaviour that would be unreasonable in any workplace.
Conveying food or drink to the mouth
(a) Cannot convey food or drink to the claimant's own mouth without receiving physical assistance from someone else;
(b) Cannot convey food or drink to the claimant's own mouth without repeatedly stopping, experiencing breathlessness or severe discomfort;
(c) Cannot convey food or drink to the claimant's own mouth without receivingregular prompting given by someone else in the claimant's physical presence; or
(d) Owing to a severe disorder of mood or behaviour, fails to convey food or drink to the claimant's own mouth without receiving:
(i) physical assistance from someone else; or
(ii) regular prompting given by someone else in the claimant's presence.
Chewing or swallowing food or drink
(a) Cannot chew or swallow food or drink;
(b) Cannot chew or swallow food or drink without repeatedly stopping, experiencing breathlessness or severe discomfort;
(c) Cannot chew or swallow food or drink without repeatedly receiving regular prompting given by someone else in the claimant's presence; or
(d) Owing to a severe disorder of mood or behaviour, fails to:
(i) chew or swallow food or drink; or (ii) chew or swallow food or drink without regular prompting given by someone else in the claimant's presence.
Also:
Life expectancy of less than 12 months, or
Waiting for, receiving or recovering from chemotherapy or radiotherapy, or
Pregnant and there is a serious risk of damage to your health or the health of the baby if you do not stop work-related activity.
There is a substantial risk to you, or others, if you are found not to have a limited capability for work-related activity.
Which one do you think should no longer be one of the criteria?
Now I have answered your questions, @fairyring25, can you answer the questions in my pp that you ignored?
Where did you get the statistic that roughly 18,000-22,000 of 16-18 year olds have LCW and live with parents?
How do you know they aren’t in education and training?
Why do you think those who are a carer, parent of victim of domestic abuse are more worthy of housing support than those who are disabled?