To wonder who david cameron thinks is deserving when people with hospitalised disabled children are not ?

[bumpsoon]

Now i know many of us were fed up about the whole CB being withdrawn from those over the threshold etc , i was ,but if that meant the Rivens of this world got a bit extra then i wouldnt mind , on the news this morning it said that those getting disability living allowance (might of got that being wrong) will not be getting it if their child is in hospital , because the nhs will be providing for the childs needs .WRONG ,WRONG,WRONG . the nhs will not provide toiletries, laundry facilities ,decent incontinence gear or (unless the child is in ITU) one to one care

The reason im so angry with DC about this is he HAS personal experience ,granted he caould afford nannies,nurses and every piece of shiny equipment his son might of needed , so surely finding himself in the ultimate posistion of power ,i would of thought he of all people would say ,no sorry thats just wrong . That doesnt detract from the pain he and his family suffered , just you would of thought he would understand how hard it must be for other families .

I don't have a problem with anyone getting on his case about it now.
I just don't like it being presented as this is a situtaion of his creation. It isn't. It would be like posting 'bloody hell, my mums pension is shit - fucking DC doesn't care about old people'..
There is enough stuff to blame him for and no doubt will be plenty more to come. Just stop withthe bloody rolling bandwagon...

Having said that Op - I do accept what you say.
I just wish people would throw their energy at current campaigns rather than using it is an easy stick to lash about. Ya boo discussions don't help - thats all .

I see you have asked for links. there are some on here.

but they are in power now, so they can change it(but they won't)

not fair!!!!!!!!

I think it's really fucking tasteless to do a sneery political point, as some have done on here, about David having had it easier. Money might have made things easier when his son was alive, but Ivan is dead.

I bet you he'd swap all the money in the world and his position as PM to have his son back.

And I think it's absolutely disgusting to pretend that any of us who've not lost a child to pretend that in some way he's luckier than we are. We're all luckier if our child is alive to even be in hospital.

I'm not a Tory, or even remotely a fan of DC's but this has really really pissed me off.

no it's not new, CB, child tax credits and DLA are withdrawn at the moment 12 weeks after a child goes into hospital, youth offenders, care or resides elsewhere. 28 days is a new 'time scale' and realistically it will affect many famililies, any one whos child has been diagnosed with a long term illness or needs a transplant or chemo etc will often be in hospital for longer than 28 days.

It is true about the 'extra' costs being more than the benefit withdrawn and Riven makes a valued point about respite care. One of my pupils was in hospital for 5 months and we as staff took to 'providing education out of school' at the hosptital for her, she had 'schooling' provided at the hospital but this way we got to see her and her mum got a few hours respite as we could 'care' for her.

One of the things this country does best is kicking people when they're down.

Sorry I missed that bit.
but he doesn't get it, like most rich people don't.
he might understand from a personal level(of course he understands that, surely that is a done deal)
but he is now the PM
he has to be prepared to take flak for choices he and his government make, and although this was already in place when he became PM, that doesn't mean it has to stay this way.

I find this idea that we can't question him because of a tragedy(and it was tragic) is silly. what next pensioners can't say anything because his dad has just died.
sadly he isn't in a position where he can hide form these issues.
he made the choice when he stood for office.

I agree that this is wrong to remove DLA from people who are sick in hospital.

However, I agree with Pag - this is not a Tory decision. And they shouldn't take a kicking for it now.

You say that DC can change it now he is in power so now have another reason to pick holes in him. Did you all protest to Labour telling them to change it when they were in power? How come its always about everything DC has done wrong? He didn't make this decision.

I don't understand how people can't see that a lot of what DC is doing is because of the mess Labour left us in. He is trying to put it right before our country sinks even further into debt. Labour did a lot of damage and DC has got to try and correct it. It will impact us all at some point.

tbh I had only heard of it this week, I saw a bit about it on tv, I am lucky never to have been affected by it.
but imo it is wrong.
if it was a labour government I would be saying the same.
it is a con, the excuse it a lie, that they won't or can't pay for care twice.
but the parent provides the care.
the hospital only provides the medical care.

I completely agree with you 2shoes, it is wrong and it disgusts me to think that people will have the added worry about how to survive on less money at a time when they must already be worried sick about their loved ones being in hospital. I think they have enough to deal with without having this additional pressure.

I agree 2shoes that he should take the flack for what he and his party and his coalition does. Of course we can (and should) question him, despite his tragedy, but not use that tragedy or demean it, which is what I have seen more and more of in recent months. People also shouldn't question his experiences as a parent and try to compare or better them - you know, oh, well he can't understand what it's really like to have a disabled child, because he was rich . I just think it's really messed up.

I get what you mean, whether you are rich or poor, the loss of a child is the same, and for that he will always have my sympathy, whatever he does.

but he won't have had the same experiences most of us have had, because money does help.
I know a mixed bunch in rl, some have oodles of money as they have won cases.
others are begging ss for help. they all love their children and suffer.
but it is easier if you have money, you can pay for stuff.....harsh I know but true,

The 28 days is the current limit for adult (over 16) DLA.

I recently spent 5 weeks in hospital with my dd, we were 2 1/2 hours away from home and had had to go in an ambulance so I had no transport, I left dd for a total of 2 hours aside from the 3 operations, I had to feed myself and her and did the vast majority of her care. The nurses, surgeons etc were absolutely fantastic and the surgery/treatmeant was without a doubt life saving and I'm eternally grateful but I did all of the day to day caring that would have taken the nurses a lot of time which they can't really spare.

It was very hard on us financially, my dp had to cut his hours so he could drop off and pick up ds from school, they travelled up once a week which was also expensive. We would have struggled even more if we had lost our DLA, dd being very unwell didn't mean she had less care needs only more, and my dp and I were less able to work not more so.

I really hope they don't cut the threshold further, it effects the most ill or most disabled.

Riven, I'm not calling anyone a liar, nor denying that being rich makes it easier to care for a disabled child.

If you read my posts properly, I'm objecting to the trend, which you have been part of, for writing off anything painful that the Camerons faced with Ivan on the basis that they had money and for implying that they somehow weren't real parents of a disabled child because they didn't suffer financially.

My point is that they have suffered more than anyone because their son is dead whereas your child (and others') is still alive so it's pretty tasteless to always do this 'but of course, it was OK for them because they had money' type of comment. Not just you, by the way, but yes you have done it too. It shouldn't be about competing about who had it worst, but, if it is, I think 'dead' is somehow worse than 'poor'.

None of which takes away from the fact that David Cameron is a tosser politically. I hate what is happening and the mindless rhetoric and demonising of anyone who has to rely on the state a little bit. The Big Society is bollocks. He lied about a lot of stuff.

However, I object to his experiences of parenting Ivan being belittled on the basis of finance.

but they didn't have the same experience as most of us, it is easier if you have money to look after a disabled child.
I don't understand why there is a problem with saying that.
why do people keep on bring the death of his son into it.

Yes, it is easier but his son is dead. I keep bringing the death of his son into it because I think it's fucking insensitive and messed up to keep going on about how he had it easy when his son died.

I really can't say it any clearer than that and I don't really give a shit if anyone agrees or not.

BUT he is the PM.
yes of course it is sad that his son died.
he is a rich man who could afford to pay for help, why is it wrong to say that, I just don't get it.
money makes lief easier, you can pay for things and not have to wait, I think the silly idea that you can't say that, well is silly.
you seem to be the one bringing up their son.

I have never said when his sone died,
I like most people are talking about DC's life as a parent of a disabled child.
all the money in the world would not make it easier when a child dies.