to wonder why there are lots of posts asking apparently innocent questions about disability benefits..

[tomhardyismydh]

am I just being a bit meh or is there an underlying reason. some of them are laced with harsh judgments in guise of an innocent question.

I don't think we should indulge the ops in even answering.

well, the OP was clearly worried about causing offence, and clearly the thread eventually kicked off and caused offence (not her fault) so perhaps she would have been better to Google.

keepingupwith exactly! but when he's laughing about this, and we don't know ourselves, it's hard to justify it to other family members! And I'd rather answer other people than have them say stuff to BIL et al.

tidydancer thank you.

FFTM that's right, but understanding how those words translate into someone's real life...

FFTM You're right, I could have googled. I didn't. But someone did post the eligibility criteria on the other thread and, tbh, if I read some of the stuff out that is on there, it still would mean nothing.

To a person seeing if they are eligible to claim, fair enough, who is reading and thinks, yep, we do that, yep, that's us, oh yes, i know that one! I can see that they are useful. But eligibility criteria and then what that looks like in somebody's lived day to day experience are completely different.

People responded saying that they had to replace mattresses because of their children's bedwetting/jumping on them; replacing school uniforms because sleeves are chewed; household furniture getting broken, etc, etc. That's a far cry from the sterile statements on a computer screen.

And if I just spouted DLA eligibility criteria to the sort of people who are already making a fuss about it, what do you think the response would be from them!

I haven't been back to the other thread, and if it's descended into nastiness, I won't. Because if people are being criticised, then it's my family they are criticising too - just because my children don't have SN, doesn't mean I don't give a shit that other people's do.

Sorry didn't mean to cause offence.

I wasn't making any judgement whatsoever on the content of the thread in question, just pointed out which thread contained details about dla and prompted me to apply!

As I said, the form is a sod and I doubt it could be blagged

none taken.

I doubt the form could be blagged as well. It's just an unfortunate turn of phrase he's used!

I do think that maybe he's doing himself, and others, a great disservice by expressing it like this.

Disability is a big issue because we have a callous Tory government. Gedit?

Oh no, not suggesting a bogus diagnosis. I can't see 'anything wrong with him' but as I've stated lots of times, I don't live with him/teach him. He certainly has some behavioural issues - he's no golden child, but I personally don't see behaviour that is as bad as his siblings. But then, I don't live with them. I see a quiet, sensitive child. But I don't see him at bedtime/in the middle of the night/at school.

Because I can't see what's wrong with him (and neither can other people in the family because it's an invisible SN), it makes it easy for other people to judge, and difficult for us to explain.

I don't think it's a bogus diagnosis - they didn't make it health professionals did.

They made a claim for DLA and it was granted. There are plenty of people who apply and don't get it - and I'm guessing that the health service (or whoever makes the diagnoses/referrals) aren't in the habit of supporting fraudulent claims!

So I have no reason to doubt that.
I just didn't know what it was for and BIL didn't seem to know either - hence football boots.

Tackle the bankers. Not the disabled Camerooney

justabout your suggestion he might be in denial makes sense. Perhaps it's easier for him to talk about 'blagging' and treating his DS1 to football boots than it is to consider what DS2s ADHD is going to mean for him/them long term.

Actually the properly antagonistic thread has been deleted. It wasn't that one.

I don't like this new rash of suggestions from posters that instead of asking questions, they go away and research themselves or google it (ref earlier in this thread, and another thread over the weekend saying the same thing)

this is a place where people come to chat.

chatting sometimes involves asking questions of other people, who have a different experience of life from you.

I do not think the answer (in general) to lots of threads about disability is to snub questions, turn people away, say "oh find it out for yourself", etc. We don't do that to each other (meaning families with disabled children/members) - we help out when people ask questions, and supply information which we know damn well is hard to get a straight answer to.

the obvious trolls and offensive posts need reporting, of course - this goes without saying.

but trying to shut down any discussion at all is not the way to go - it is just segregating the disabled and those with SN, imo.

herbie, it was pointed out to MNHQ that the thread was started by a poster who had been particularly vile on other threads concerning disability, that it was too much of a coincidence that that self same poster was now asking questions about free road tax for disabled people and then trying to start an argument on that thread by challenging factual information given to them.

Good old classical trolling in short.

strawberries, I for one am glad to answer genuinely put questions.
But when that self same poster has been rude and condescending to me then I will not put myself out.

When that person has been hurtful about my children I am not going to try to educate them, especially when I believe that their question was not placed to seek education.

Yes the leadf story in saturdays Times was that disabled people were being bullied. check it out

Glitter, I am not saying anyone should answer any questions at all. Particularly if the poster has been rude and offensive.

I was commenting on what I see as a new direction that almost all the threads I have seen mentioning disability recently have taken - a new direction by the "SN posters" (sorry to group together) - short, blunt, saying "oh go and look it up!" etc.

I do understand that many of us are at the end of our tethers wrt answering the same old questions again and again. and I do not in any way think that the trolling and offensive threads should be tolerated.

but there is room in this whole debate to discuss. sometimes, people have the wrong end of the stick about something; sometimes they just want more info, and help in understanding that info. in these cases, answering, and giving examples and info is all that is needed (although inevitably the thread will also attract twattish posts unfortunately).

I think what I am saying is that we should be careful not to let our zero tolerance for twattery tip over into censoring all threads where disability is mentioned or more information sought.

There does seem to be a huge amount of criticism atm in the press and online aimed at disability claimants. These are not benefits and are not related to not working in the same way as income support etc. These benefits should be untouchable imo Some of the questions on here are genuine from people who are interested or curious as to how it all works but sadly many are provocative and hoping for a reaction

perhaps because of the nasty threads and posts, people just have had enough at the moment.I am sure it will settle down once that is stopped.

strawberries again, I will generally engage with and answer questions, no matter how many times... if you see me telling someone to go look it up it is precisely because they have been rude or hurtful to me.

"Hate crimes against the disabled are up."

My theory is that it's because of

1. exposure of window cleaners etc etc but also
2. resentment about DLA being awarded to children with ADHD and ADD which many people don't believe exist.

and 2. with particular ref to people who consider others to be "really" disabled but not entitled, compared to those they consider "naughty children with bad parents".

also 2. with ref to the fact that ADD and ADHD are (I read) more commonly diagnosed among less priviliged families leading to
a. strengthening the belief that they are "naughty children with bad parents" and
b. strengthening the resentment among poorer people who do not claim benefits.

I think this is why it's happening.

I think they are both real, and I think both are over-diagnosed: however I think both are definitely real.

I just put that last bit in because I don't want to be jumped on as someone who thinks they're "made up". I don't think any such thing.

Gabby agree! Go get those bankers! how considerate of them to have ready-made rhyming slang, though.
I was justifying explaining my timewasting dedication on here to dh by saying that if there are no views opposing the 'sky is falling' deficit/debt obsession peddled by the govt then claimants etc will feel more isolated, cutters more vindicated.