TO SAY Camerons Policies are in danger of getting all disabled people labelled as "Scroungers"

[ScousyFogarty]

That is a wicked thing do do and David Cameron beeds to apologise or more likely get one of his flunkies to say SORRY

Tax pounds that I paid gladly prior to finding myself in this situation.
My working life stopped once the kids' needs reached a certain level. When they were babies they didn't need vastly more care than others the same age. They do now. I worked, I paid tax. My husband worked, he paid tax. My aim is to do so again one day.

I think you'd worry about the money coming into your home too if it was going to stop, with no way of replacing it.

Live my life for five years.
Endure the kind of ignorant comments you have been spouting freely through this thread.

Then make those self same comments.

I'm also not self interested in my family.
It's those with members of their family that require full time care. Those who have no other option.

*I think you'd worry about the money coming into your home too if it was going to stop, with no way of replacing it.

I think just about every parent in this country has exactly that same worry. Its called Threat of Redundancy, alternatively Losing Your Job, or how about Losing Your Job and Having to do Rubbish Badly Paid Job to Make Ends Meet?

Oh I know people do suffer najinski - I think this country is outstanding in it's support of those people who DO suffer but all I can see is that more and more is being cut from everyone who is vulnerable. And I am equally SICK TO DEATH of the headlines which portray me and every other parent caring for a disabled child as some kind of scrounger aboard a gravy train. Equally I am sick of ATOS who deemed a friend of mine who is SO agoraphobic that leaving the house is hard as "fit for work" I mean wtf is that all about. Interestingly when she took it to appeal (supported by me, her support worker, GP and psychologist) they rapidly reversed their decision. She is now filling in the form every 12 weeks instead.

Once I lose the DLA (which I have no doubt will happen) I will lose my ability to work part-time, pay my rent and council tax and get by financially. Working full time where I would be well paid enough not to need any tax credits will be out of the question as my son would not cope with childcare. So guess the tax payer will have to keep me, pay my rent and council tax etc for me. It'll cost em more than I receive in tax credit and DLA but hey - as long as I am off the "gravy train" and no longer getting disability support that's okay. Well done Mr Cameron - excellent work

Fine, I'll do that badly paid job.
You come look after the kids, yeah? There's no SN childcare round here, family unable to assist....
There's only three hospital appointments this week, two on the same day within an hour of each other thirty miles apart.
Oh, and sorry if you get punched/bitten, that's just the way it is.

why would nijinsky say " But you certainly all know how to talk the "I'm entitled, I'm important" talk, don't you?" your proving us right nijinsky that you are ill informed and have no morality or conscience its an old saying about writers but it follows and is a useful guidline for life in general that if you dont know about a subject you should not comment ...unfortunately my Husband lost his life really (sitting in a wheelchair isnt much of a life compared to the active role in society he played before) and limbs to GIVE YOU the right to sit there and slag him and people like him off you talk of RIGHTS!!!!! you evidently have no clue what that actually means in RL , must be so nice to have no imperfections no disability no feelings, its reminicent of a man who invaded poland he really springs to mind

I don't see how staying on topic makes me blinkered to others in need. This is a thread specific to disability. Should it be about CWP or pension for example I'd defend equally the right of those in need to be supported.

You conveniently ignore the fact that people made redundant etc can CLAIM some benefits. Those who lose disability support can replace it with nothing and often going out to work is out of the question.

With your comments you display your ignorance of the realities we have from day to day.

For some - earning money is going to be out of the question. And I would argue that carers DO earn their money as they save the tax payer a great deal in providing care for disabled relatives. The cost of providing the care outside of the home would be prohibitive.

Actually I can't believe that not a modicum of this is penetrating some people's ideology.

I am not so dyed in the wool by my politics that I don't acknowlege that ATOS and ESA and all the grief they have given were introduced by labour, but the current policy that is affecting my kids' lives is by this government. Should labour get in in future and make similar moves then I would oppose just as strongly.

I don't let my political beliefs override what I believe to be right.
I like to believe that I have empathy, unlike some on this thread.

I've already stated that full time institutionalisation of my three is quarter of a million pounds a year. I don't get that in benefits.

Oh and by the way I have the time to contribute to this thread as my daughter is asleep on my lap after being up all night wheezing to the extent of needing a nebuliser. I'm sat here still checking on her breathing to see whether or not we need to call an ambulance. OK?

People like smile and Glitter are actually saving this country millions by caring for people who cannot care for themselves.

But you are'nt the only people who are suffering. Thats what you seem to think. This country needs to make cuts, and the burden has to be shared. I do also think that it is good for systems to be updated so that loopholes which are being exploited can be closed, and to tighten up procedures.

I really want to see DLA and associated benefits targetted at those genuinely in need. Not just at those who shout the loudest or are skilled at making their case.

While there are people going around competing in their sports at weekends, sticking to a schedule that would exhaust any able bodied person, at the taxpayer's expense, then its obvious there is abuse of the system.

Everyone knows there is abuse. Everyone knows there are people who exploit the system who shouldn't be on there. And you are saying that fear of losing your benefits is a reason for efficiencies and modernisation not to be made?

Surely if you are genuinely in need of these benefits, you would have nothing to fear?

What in the name of god are you on, nijinsky?

As has been said multiple times, most of the people on this thread were hard-working taxpayers, and would love to be so again. Shame about the crippling illness or 24/7 work caring.

One moment you're bibbling about targetting those truly in need, the next you're accusing people of selfishness for suggesting the well-off don't need Cold Weather Payments.

Loving your perverted belief that anyone who stands up for disability rights can't possibly care about anyone else's rights. IME the opposite is true.

Wubbly.... it's billions. £119 billion to be exact.

www.carersuk.org/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=2121&Itemid=8

sorry here

We have everything to fear. ATOS has targets. Those in genuine need will be denied to meet government targets.

I have no problem with standing up to scrutiny. I have at least five health professionals per child contributing to the evidence I give the DWP. ATOS wouldn't take this into consideration though.

You are totally failing to understand DLA once again Nijinsky.

You can be working full time and receive DLA, as the idea is to help those who need access as a normal a life as possible. It is there to help those who need additional care overcome the obstacles to ordinary life that the rest of us take for granted.

A blind/deaf athlete could quite easily be entitled to DLA and still whop your arse in the 100 metres, so what?

Can you support your constant assertion to 'abuse' in the system? You keep going on about it, I'd like to know where you get this information from, other than your own prejudices.

"Surely if you are genuinely in need of these benefits, you would have nothing to fear?"

Haven't you read any of this thread?

Less than 1 % fraud, but 20 % cuts to DLA. Who's the other 19% going to come from?

Threshold for Incapacity Benefit/ESA moved from unable to earn a living to unable to do anything. What are the people who can't earn a living supposed to do?

Incapacity people tell them to sign on for JobSeekers, Job people tell them to fuck off they're clearly not capable of working.

They fall into Income Support which is a benefit of last resort designed a) to be punitively low so as to not encourage people to live on it, and b) is not designed to pay for stuff like additional heating, mobility aids, adapted clothing, etc.

Their quality of life will be barely tenable, dropping into acute, expensive medical crisis at the smallest thing, as they're not able to keep adequately warm, fed, clean or safe.

The next set of headlines after these cuts will be sick (and elderly) people being found dead and dying in their homes in increasing numbers. That is what cuts to the most vulnerable means.

Actually, I train with one of the most talented athletes in this country, who happens to be deaf. She makes no claim on benefits at all and lives as normal a life as she can.

As I say, if you have a genuine need, I cannot see why you would oppose reforms designed to ensure that those genuine needs are met.

We don't oppose reforms designed to ensure genuine needs are met.

We do oppose these current reforms. Not the same thing.

Again, one of the most talented sprinters the UK is diabetic, as is another girl in my training group. Both need constant medical treatment but recieve no other assistance and want to lead totally normal lives, not to be considered disabled.

I cannot see, why if you have such a genuine need for support, you would do anything other than encourage these reforms. But then I cannot see how anyone with any grasp of reality can confuse conviction rates for fraud with investigation rates, never mind actual rates. Because all examples of fraud are found out, investigaged and result in convictions. Of course they do. Or alternatively, reforming the system is likely to be cheaper and more successful in reducing fraud.

These reforms mean more support for those who genuinely need it. Why oppose it if your needs are genuine?

Good on them.
Some have levels of disability where that isn't possible.