To agree with some of the cuts being made

[lesley33]

Obviously I mean cuts being made by the Government. I have been reading stories in the press about some of the cuts being made that have examples of people who will suffer because of these. Some I don't agree with, but with some that you are obviously supposed to sympathise with I think, well thats fair enough cutting that. Fine in an ideal world, but hardly a necessity.

For example, I totally disagree with cuts to speech therapy and physiotherapy - always seems to be undervalued when it comes to public funding.

But some charging for services to disbled people seems fair enough. Lots of these services such as a local bus pass that gives free transport to disabled people came into being before DLA. But now DLA exists, surely this should be used to pay for things like this?

Also read stories about people not getting DLA in spite of disabilities. Lots of people don't seem to understand you get DLA not just because you are disabled, but because you need help with everyday tasks such as bathing, cooking, etc. If people don't need help, then no they shouldn't get DLA whatever their disability.
AIBU?

borderslass - but surely that is what DLA is for, to meet those extra costs?

apocalypse - Although DLA is not mean't to replace lost earnings, if you are having to spend time with your son that you wouldn't have to spend with a child who doesn't have autism then this is fine. The DLA is effectively paying you to provide the extra care your son needs. If you didn't do it, you would have to pay someone else. This is exactly the purpose of DLA.

Okay forget it. I have never said that DLA should be cut. DLA is a great benefit.

All I said about DLA was:

1. I can understand cuts being made to free services that DLA is meant to pay for. Most of these services exist from before DLA existed and so were absolutely vital then. But IMO not so vital now.

1. I have seen stories in the paper about disabled people complaining they have not got DLA, but when I read I could understand why they haven't - as they didn't need extra support/help with everyday tasks.

Companionship is vital for lots of elderly people, who don't normally get DLA. I think there should be more emphasis on preventing loneliness and isolation.

Costs more than that though that's just one example I drive 122 miles a day to take him to school mean I cant work as well, he can't be left unsupervised as he will destroy the house or injure himself another reason I can't work doesn't cover loss of earnings most peoples kids will leave home live independently he wont it will have to be supported living.

Would be great if the "big society" would do this, but suspect it needs paid support as well. computermouse - I'm not a conservative supporter you know!

TheSecondComing they have also cut child benefit to top rate taxpayers. I remember a big outcry on mums net about this - a cut I agree with. Whenever I ask people where the cuts should be, the examples people give would not raise anywhere near enough money.

well said dude

dude of course being tsc not lesley

lesley - so why don't you befriend an elderly person and drive them about

So OP a parent whose child needs nappies due to incontinence should pay for these from DLA? Is this what you are advocating? They are already restricted to 4 per day despits "shineydave" promising to correct this to "based upon need". You are suggesting this cut in continence supplies is correct and parents should fund from DLA? Just want to be sure I have understood you.

Lesley. We could cut Trident. We could stop giving millions in foreign aid to countries which have their own aid programmes. We could start clamping down on tax evasion/avoidance. We could not spend 200 million on a self serving referendum on AV. These are just a few examples.

But instead, the government goes straight for the poorest and most vulnerable, with a few nice headlines thrown in by the right wing press to make them scapegoats and garner support. The fact that you are supporting cuts to charities that help disabled people suggest to me that their propaganda is working.

No I am not advocating cutting nappies. I think it is ridiculous that these are restricted to 4 a day. I didn't say I agree with all cuts, just some of them.

I do currently volunteer and am going over to an elderly women's house now to walk her dog as I do every week. Her dog gives her important companionship, but she can't walk it so a team of volunteers do. But I wouldn't see this as a priority for funding.

But I have talked about other cuts as well including child benefit and child trust fund, nobody is picking up on those./

I really need to go now or I will be late, so can't answer any more posters until later. But just wanted to day borderslass you should be entitled to extra money if you have to drive your autistic son so far most days. Maybe there is a need for a discretionary fund to fund specific needs like this that can't be allocated under a blanket policy.

Also blanketlass, there are charities who can sometimes help with costs. If you are struggling financially pm me and I will email you details.

no one wants the cuts to affect anything THEY do, me included

The cuts to child benefit are stupid and unfair though - I don't care if I lose my child benefit because DP is a high tax payer, I don't have an income, but obviously his income is ok or we'd not be losing child benefit

I do care if next door are a couple who make almost twice what we do, but because both of them earn just under the tax threshold, they're going to carry on getting it

It should be on household income, not one person's income.

I kind of agree that the mobility element of DLA does make a bus pass a bit of overkill, but I can't see that being a massive amount of money for the government to save tbh - but that's about the only one that I can think of, so what are the rest of the things you think are unnecessary if someone's getting DLA?

You do realise that £73.60 is the highest care amount? That doesn't pay for help with cooking or bathing, it's not enough to pay someone else to do it, even just those two things, nevermind any other care needs - what it does do is combine with the generous maximum of £53.90 of carer's allowance to allow a parent or spouse to do it without starving them both while doing so.

My council's cuts to services are all disability or children's services, the very people I'm happy my DP pays taxes to support - and that's what's being targetted... because not enough people who are not affected cares enough to complain, and those that are affected are too busy trying to cope to complain.

So yes YABU - because if you want to talk about cuts, there was absolutely no need to mention people not getting DLA because they're not entitled to it, that's what turns it into a DLA bashing thread

can't be arsed with such arguments. OP you are a total nugget and you know it. good for you and your fabulous superhuman self that doesn't need help.

now fuck off back under your rock

Mamaz0n ,couldn't have put it better myself

Lesley33 do you have any idea exactly how much is paid to an individual who is entitled to DLA? You seem under a delusion that it amonts to a vast amount, to cover transport, support a lovely lifestyle and Christ knows what else.
Maybe have a little look at the facts. Because, sweetheart, it is NOT a King's ransome each week.
Oh, and well said Mamazon.

I see you are the same OP who started the stereotypes thread.

and hiding this waste of a time thread!

Goodbye OP, I will not be returning to your thread, but will be outside in the sunshine with my disabled daughter. Cheerio dear.

'I have seen stories in the paper about disabled people complaining they have not got DLA, but when I read I could understand why they haven't - as they didn't need extra support/help with everyday tasks.'

Anyone caught reading the DM should have their computer confiscated and sold with the proceeds going to charities for the disabled.