to think that cuts for disabled people doesn't seem to have the cool factor or whatever that the student thing had?

[daisy5678]

or why are the papers so strangely silent on the issue?

If you agree that cutting disability services and financial support is wrong, please come to

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/mumsnet_campaigns/1126669-Stop-the-Abolition-of-DLA?msgid=23240953#23240953

If disabled people did organise a protest then you can absolutely guarantee plenty of fuckwit comments about "well, if they can protest then they can work.."

Because some people are too incredibly thick to worry about facts.

It's really dangerous to take the stance that 'these cuts won't happen' because unless we make it clear the impact it will have on people then yes they bloody well will!

Maybe that is why we are not getting heard here?

I really hate dave scam, I think he has done the worst kind of con.

as for protesting, well sadly I don't have the time, I have too many appointments and forms to fill in at the moment.

Absolutely Riven. Do you have any idea how much those support services COST? So they'll deduct her DLA thank you very much to pay for it.

DLA is an essential benefit to enable people to cover the extra costs that arise through having a disability. I have uncontrolled epilepsy, and need special pillows for if I have a seizure in the night, to prevent suffocation if I end up face down during a nocturnal seizure - they cost me £30 each, and need replacing every 6 months. I need to pay an annual subscription for my medical bracelet to keep the information held on it up to date. I need to spend an absolute fortune on bus fares because the free bus pass I am offered cannot be used before 9.30am, therefore I cannot use it to get my dc to school (too far to walk). I have to get my shopping home by Taxi as I am not allowed to drive. I have to have extra kitchen eqiupment such as a kettle tipper.

I would not have any of these extra expenses if I did not suffer from this disability. Yet the riteria for qualification for DLA for epilepsy for adults has changed. It used to be (until last July, just as my renewal was due) that you automatically qualified for DLA for epilepsy if you had an average of one seizure/ loss of conciousness a week (ave. 52 seizures/yr). Now you have to have an average of two seizures a week to qualify (ave. 104 seizures/yr). So I no longer qualify.

I'm no more employable when I could have to take at least 52 days off per year because of my disability, than I would be if I had to have 104 days off. Employers still aren't willing to employ me.

These cuts disgust me. For 99.9% of the disabilities you can claim DLA for, there would just be no way of 'making it up'. Have these people that are talking about medical tests for DLA ever actually seen a DLA form or tried to fill one in? It's like the seventh circle of hell, and you LITERALLY have to spell out how many times a day you have to go to the toilet (for needing help), and if you need help cleaning yourself up when you have a period. Nobody fills in information like that if they don't actually NEED the money!

And how the fuck can the Government say that they want to cut the amount of claimants of DLA by 20%?? By the very fact that only 0.4% of DLA claims are fraudulent, surely that means that 99.6% of DLA claims are genuine claims from people that genuinely need that (small amount of) money to cover some of the additional costs they incur through their disability.

So if they cut the amount of claimants by 20%, surely that means that around 20% of GENUINELY DISABLED PEOPLE THAT NEED THIS MONEY will no longer be getting it? Which group of disabled adults will the Government decide no longer qualifies for DLA to cut the number of claimants down? They've already done it to adults with epilepsy, who are in a group that are very unlikely to get gainful employment (and are often barred from even voluntary work in a number of areas if their epilepsy is uncontrolled).

Who next to pick on? People with mental health issues? (cannot speak out for themselves?) People with asd? (not enough social awareness to understand the implications?) People with severe learning difficulties? (unable to speak out for themselves?) FFS!

Blair/Brown were not as bad as Cameron and the previous Tory administration. No government treats disabled people well in that none of them try to make disabled people equal which would require much more investment. However, Labour changed things for the better.

Things for my son who is 14 started to get steadily better and better - from a position of completely fucking unmanageable - often thanks in part to Labour: Direct Payments introduced, Tax Credits which had a severe disability component, Aiming High to name but three major changes...

The result of cuts will be more children put in care

It worries me immensely.

YANBU. It's shameful.

A lot of people who are personally affected will have / will be writing to their MP. It would be a start if everyone also forwarded these letters to their local paper (particularly if they got a crap response from the MP). Then to the national press asking them why the hell they aren't covering this properly. Also, I feel the big national disability charities could be doing a lot more in informing the general public and getting people outraged about this.

Riven, I think perhaps the reason a lot of people aren't so bothered about these cuts is because there has been a very effective media smear campaign over a long period to the effect that people claiming disability benefits are often untrustworthy benefit scroungers.

Funny that isn't it No big protests, no strident banners.

I found myself less supportive of the students than I would have expected TBH. Loud and self-righteous self-interest as far as I could see. Would have felt better about it if they protested about many other issues as well as student used to. DLA would have been an excellent start.

I'm someone that hasn't made a fuss about this, but it's not that I don't care about the issue. I think unaffected NT people just don't have a good enough understanding of the whole issue. I have alot of disabled friends, but tbh, we don't really talk about things like this when we are out, and although my ds has AS, we don't get DLA anyway. Everything I know about it and about the effects of the cuts I've learned from here. This site has given me a fantasic insight into the issues that people with SN children or with disabilities face, and as I said, I have a huge amount of contact with disabled people.

I read the government review stuff that was linked to on the other thread, and even on that it's very hard to find much to object to. Obviously because it has been very cleverly written, and mentions over and over that it's about helping those with the most barriers to independant living, which on the face of it all seems very sensible.

Until unaffected people understand the direct affects of this, and the things that disabled people will be denied, unfortunately this campaign will only be supported by those in the know. I don't think this is unsupported by NT people because they think that disabled benefits claiments are scroungers.

Another reason why Mumsnet should back a campaign.

Sheer force of numbers should not be the only reason to back something surely.........

Tories are often blamed for these horrendous cuts after a labour government..simply because they have to make cuts due to Labour's overspending. It happened in the early 80's and it's happening now.

Of course DLA shouldn't be affected (before someone jumps on me) and I am bloody sure there are other ways to make cuts.

I am not saying the cuts WON'T happen, I have said I can't SEE them happening..and I add again, maybe it's wishful thinking.

I think the fraud rate is probably higher too, actually. After all, they can only count the ones who have been caught and sometimes that takes months/years to discover. It's those they should be concentrating on with regards to cuts, not the genuine disabled people who desperately need the help.

I have seen the forms, I have filled them in. They make it laborious to try and stop you from claiming..but for some who are fraudulent, the idea of picking up a tidy sum of money won't put them off, so it's counter-productive.

Deciduous... how tf would the fraudulent claims actually back themselves with EVIDENCE? Five professional reports back my kids' applications...

The Government have gone for the easy target here, and it's beyond shameful. Not only in cutting benefits but propagating the view that most claimants ought to get off their backsides and help themselves.

I haven't a clue, Glitterknickaz. The evidence I have seen so far with a 'friend' of mine is that she has filled out the forms, with no diagnosis from professionals, and is receiving high rate DLA.

From that I can only gather that there will be others...

I have also had professional reports from consultants for my daughter, and have still been refused DLA.

It's pretty much a given that you will be turned down tbh. I've had to appeal DS2's decision. It's to try to put you off.

Your friend would have had to have provided hefty back up for her claim, her gp or consultant would have been contacted to back her claim.

Surely given your history of application you knew that....

So rather than complain about that get a reconsideration or appeal in!

The fact you (like many others of us) have to do this is really inconvenient given the amount of other stuff we need to do but it's no reason to want DLA to cease to exist, surely?