To think every SAHM, low hour PT worker and carer should read this?

[Peachy]

Well i am not but it matters to you so you must

here

Changes to system WRT worker hours

have a thread in chat and don;t want a debate, or at least won't participate iun one as petrified as we will now certianly lose our home and not up to taking flak. But if it affects you, you need to know.

No Peachy, not round here they're not.

but wasnt IB about parking people out of work but out of the unemployment numbers, so politicains could say unemployment was low under them?

now the system is looking not at whose disabilty makes it harder to get/keep a job but who has extra care needs.

so people who qualified under the old system wont quality under the new one.

In reality these changes won't affect dh and I.

But I can't understand how people on this thread cannot understand how bad this is for the country.

I am all for getting the long term unemployed into work. But this is disgraceful. Surely people cannot be sticking their head in the sand and not realising how bad the long term consequences of this will be?

It's the end of the welfare state being there to help those who need it. It's the end of the safety net that dragged people put of the slums at the end of WW2.

Bring back the workhouses because we are going to need them

Stands firmly in Hecate's corner.

Rocky I hope you are never in a position to HAVE to use the services that some of us use.
As for a bit of Mumsnet hysteria lookattheears That's the problem, these changes do make people frightened and worried for their future.

Bored with being patronised by people who think they are morally superior.

So if I think people shouldn't produce children ( disabled or otherwise) that they can't afford to raise, I'm an idiot and should go fuck myself.

Oh dear.

Tilly in some cases absolutely that happened- eg the mines; that was to Government benefit as unemployment rates did not shoot up.
But was also the system for sick, not as if sick / disabled get to choose their system is it?

Alou no doubt but shows you cannot base on his income.

Oh no moonlight: no workhouse needed here!

We will make our businesses work then chuck ££££££ at fighting this Government out of office.

well I missed the thread!!!!

It's been deleted!!!!

Peachy am I affected???

But what if your disability DOES make it nigh on impossible to get or KEEP a job? Is it right that they should be subject to sanctions on their money if they cannot find anyone WILLING to employ them? Or if they get sacked for taking too much time off sick? Or if working FT makes their disability WORSE (it did with my epilepsy - I ended up being asked to leave my last FT job due to taking too much time off sick - I think the final straw was when I had a major seizure on the shop floor in the middle of a shift, lost control of my bladder, with a customer right next to me - and the store had to compensate her for her shoes. I was a liability.

Yet I will be subject to sanctions if I cannot find a job. A FT job. That I am not medical;ly FIT to do.

So you would scrap child benefit? As those producing children should only be rich thus rendering child benefit unnecessary.

You believe only the rich should have children. The poor should not be allowed to infect the gene pool.

Yes you are clearly an idiot Lookattheears.

I'm probably going to be lamped for this but does anyone else think that "disabled" has become more all encompassing?

Disabled used to mean unable to use limbs or breathe unaided but now it encompasses special educational needs.

I'm wondering if Lookatthears has ever used a different posting name...

Until we have decent schools in ALL areas, plentiful jobs, plentiful training, manual jobs etc I am sick and tired of the poor being blamed for their predicament. Some poeple live in a bubble. Try growing up in a place with no heating, no decent food, no examples of anything beyond the shitty estate and the shitty school. Where you dont even hear about university as an option and anyway, its for wealthy people.
Where are the jobs? Where is the childcare for disabled children? Affordable childcare.
The reason families have to be propped up with Housing Benefit and CTC is that house prices are ridiculous (and favour wealthy homeowners), the NMW is too low and utility prices are rising so far above infltion you cant see them with a telescope.
Come on ears, answer that from your middle class bubble.

We both usually work full time but I am on mat leave with dc2 at the moment and will probably go back part time as fulltime childcare x2 will cost me my wage after travel etc. We don't claim tax credits so won't be affected but thinking out loud..

Say for example you were both working fulltime on NMW. Childcare is approx 30 per day per child so 300.00 per week for our two.. That would leave you with 100.00 per week to pay mortgage, bills, food, everything and those costs are all steadily rising.

Without gov subsidy how the eff would normal families like this have any standard of living? What is wrong with this picture?

Peachy i agree about the mines - it was for the govts benefit.

if you make your business work... you wont believe me now....but you will see this differently.

bythe CB has been axed for hig rate tax payers

I think you will find SEN and SN while often overlapping, are actually two different things.

"but wasnt IB about parking people out of work but out of the unemployment numbers, so politicains could say unemployment was low under them?"

Here's a graph of UK unemployment figures, showing a huge trough between 2000 and 2008 approx.

So no, it's not plausible to say that people were being awarded IB to keep them off the unemployment stats at that time. There was some motivation for it in the 1980s, but not recent years.

Alouise disbaled has always meant what used to be termed mentally ahndicapped, which was what most people with an ASD were labelled before it was divvied into specific diagnoses. I have worked in and with SN for 21 years so really, this is true. just in the very old days they were all locked away after diagnosis and aprents told to forget about them.

Again. You said "And why, why would anyone deliberately take the huge risk of bringing a child they think will be disabled, into the world? I'm pretty gobsmacked by that. Why would you do that?"

DISABLED

Not - why would an individual bring a child into the world that they can't afford, no You asked why anyone would take the risk of bringing a child they think - think - not even know, just think will be disabled, into the world.

So first of all, it's anyone, why would ANYONE risk having a disabled child.

No mention of affordability there. Just the question why would ANYONE risk bringing a disabled child into the world.

And now you try to turn it into bringing a child into the world that you can't afford.

Well, that's not what you said.

You don't understand why ANYBODY would bring a child that may possibly, perhaps be disabled into the world.

That is very different from what you are now trying to claim.

So, to answer your question...

Yes. Yes you are and yes, yes you should.

Tilly I won't, we were on a high wage years ago and I felt exactly the same way. Sorry but true. I am a big enough girl to know my own morality and convictions.

Oh silly me. I was forgetting.
You ALWAYS know a child is going to be disabled before it's born don't you?

Do I hear something under that bridge over yonder?

In answer to your question

"And why, why would anyone deliberately take the huge risk of bringing a child they think will be disabled, into the world? I'm pretty gobsmacked by that. Why would you do that?"

Before we had DS1 we knew our chances of having disabled children were high. If we wanted children then we had to accept that they would probably be disabled. For your information DS2 and 3 will most likely be able to work full time when they are grown up but even if they couldn't then their lives would still be worth living.

I also never said we couldn't afford 4 children. We would have to go without stuff if we lost the tax credits but we would be ok on DH's wage alone. We shop carefully and the DC's are all boys so clothes can be passed down. We don't get much extra CTC for DS3 anyway and most people get some form of tax credits. Yes DH is on a fairly low wage but he works full time plus overtime. I will start looking for paid employment when our children no longer need me to be on call for them. Oh and DH will be getting the snip before this one is born as we obviously can't rely on the pill anymore.

Should add, 2000-2008 was the bottom of the trough; unemployment shown plummeting from 1993.

*So you would scrap child benefit? As those producing children should only be rich thus rendering child benefit unnecessary.

You believe only the rich should have children. The poor should not be allowed to infect the gene pool.*

Yes, that is EXACTLY what I said [hmm}

Oddly enough, it's the better off that have lost CB and TC under The Evil Tories.

I do believe that you should be able to support yourself predominantly. Benefits should not be the majority of your income nor should you have child after child in that situation. Hardly bloody radical!

Or do you expect the tax payer just to keep on paying because, newsflash, there simply isn't enough money . And I'd rather what money there is went on those in genuine need rather than allowing people to have child after child.

"No mention of affordability there. Just the question why would ANYONE risk bringing a disabled child into the world."

Thats a risk EVERYONE who gets pregnant takes on.