to think benefits should be capped at minimum wage

[moogster1a]

A little idea that all benefits should be capped at a weeks worth of minimum wage; so 37 and half hours times whatever minimum wage is now ( £6 pounds odd ).
That way no one gets paid more for sitting at home than they would for going out to work.
Out of this, all rent prescriptions etc. should be paid, the same as most people in low paid jobs have to pay for everything.
it might also provide an incentive to go out to work to up your wages if you progress in a company.
Just think it would be a lot fairer.

xenia

do you have any idea how much a childminder or such charges for a child with sn .? .

It would cost them a lot more to meet 70% o the costs than what we get .

.Why do you think sn playschemes and respite has been cut and in fact in a lot of cases do not get anything at all as theres no money available .And thats to provide carers with essential thinsg like sleep a break or a chance to spend soem 1-1 time with other dc

so where they are one going to magic up people that can provide the care and two pay for it ,

Most people don't have disabled children. Most of those on state benefits don't.

If we did deem it best for everyone that those in receipt of benefits work then you would need for example to swap the parents of children with the same disability or have them looking after two at once or whatever. The concept would be that no benefit was provided unless you did at least some work for it.

The point is Xenia, we do work for it, albeit in our own homes, but we work extraordinarily hard for it. In fact, physically, mentally, emotionally and yes, intellectually, we all probably work a bloody site harder than you.

I would say that the parents of disabled children DO work for their "benefits". If a parent could not cope and a child went into care then the cost to the taxpayer would be much much higher surely. As it is we have a system where parents ask for help and support and often don't get much in return.

As the parent of a child with autism/ADHD/learning difficulties I can still be trying to settle DS at midnight and beyond meaning I am constantly exhausted. I do manage to work as well but part time only and even that's difficult, there may come a time where I cannot work at all although I hope not because my work keeps me sane!

Do SN children have the right to attend after school clubs etc. even if extra support is needed? under the DDA?

Yes Milly, they do. However, there are many that wouldn't cope with after school clubs, those with ASDs for example, may not cope with noise, lights, smells etc.

thank you for the answer DD. i hear what you are saying in the general sense but surely if a child is able to attend main stream school, equal access to before/after school activities should be provided?

(DP is a HT but i am aware his view of school is v different thna SN children's parents)

It's a difficult one, Milly, lots of variables. Who is running it, is it timetabled, how well is it organised, is food provided.
Thing is with mainstream school, things are, or should be in place, but this can't be guaranteed with an after school club.

thank you again DD - i will pass it into DP (i dont tell him, i was on MN at work and learnt from SN childrens parents, i say i was thinking about the govt changes and wondered how his school can work better to help with.... you get the picture )

Well, now the country is effectively bust I suspect much of the last 23 pages is moot. You all know what the answer will be going forward.

The school mine have to attend (MS two) don't offer after school coubs and I was turned down permission to apply elsewhere as the school that does is very over subscribed with catchment kids. LEA won;t help with transport around after school clubs / provision either so I woulds till be faced with teh isue of kids in opposite directions by 10 miles.

And ds1 is at comp now: most kids his age can walk home and let themselves in, why would they even consider an afters chools cheme when there are only 12 in the attached provision he uses?

'If we did deem it best for everyone that those in receipt of benefits work then you would need for example to swap the parents of children with the same disability or have them looking after two at once or whatever'

So some parent of a child who is vulnerable should be amde to take both of mine even though ds1 would absolutely ahrm them (parents and kids)?

yeah that'd work.

Not sure what planet you are on Xenia but it ain't mine!

If they really want to help us back into work, some self employment support would go far further, as opposed to the advisory lady at the LA who said 'ooh I don't know anything about your field but I wanted to meet you becuase my sister had autism'. petrol money + parking- wasted. include acarers into the back to work schemes that guarantee interviews for people on JSA etc for so long- after all every plan that puts someone under 21 / on JSA / etc ahead in a queue puts us at the back. Make it so that if you attend college on a vocational course unfunded your allownace does not simply disappear- lots of courses run school hours and would mean people on CA could get into careers they could actually work around their responsibilities, but obviously paying the rent has to be the priority.

I spoke to a friend today; she was recently amde redundant from a well known store, first day at abother branch she was told that store was closing as well: she now works for an associated company and they are moving in 6 months and will expect her to work until 8. Except her DH works nights, and her son has GDD< severe autism and is blind. She's taken the job but he passes toa dult services in that time and she has no guarantee that he will get any further support (the respite carers he has refuse to work for adult services as that emans a move to self employment). There must be a hundred ways that she can be helped into work or at least knowing what her options will be, and anyone who claims she does not want to work is clearly dim.

But ultimately if we are going to be treated as those who chose to not work then give us the same chances to get back in: access to childcare, interview help and a decent shot at the game. Or help with alternatives (apparently under new system those on JSA 6 months will get help with setting up for themselves- NOT those on CA though). Right now though it seems to work against us getting back into work, or even accessing a level playing field.

'employers don't tend to choose those on benefits emplyers get £1000 for employing someone on benefits'

Again not CA; why? Why is my right to work less than someone for eg sacked for incompetence?

I used to be disabled but I'm not now. I was a lawyer, got sick, and am now a practising lawyer again.

I didnt realise I should've been punished with a minimum wage income for getting sick.

Well LongGone I should be cleaning goalposts for my benefits and not using my qualifications. Research stage of MA so could claim the PGC if I wished but clearly all I can do is wipe down goalkposts for 4 hours in exchange for my £55 PW.

Not, for example, help at a school for kids with SN, or for the CAB, or even just be allowed to complete my studies in the daytime instead of at 3am.

I am a single mother and carer to two disabled children who like other posters above also receives the pay of £55 pw for the 336 hour week I work, yes WORK, caring for my children. I am university educated yet am stuck at home caring for my two children who are severely dependant on me because I love them.
Like other posters have mentioned, it costs the government £1000+ a week to look after a disabled child in care, so I'm actually saving tax payers a lot of money.
I asked for social services to offer me respite as I had a nervous breakdown 2 years ago due to the intense pressure of caring for my two children and was hospitalised for a month. I am still not receiving any.
What life do I have that makes posters such as Xenia, believe I should be doing more?
I have often felt suicidal due to the pressures I face being a carer. I am incredibly upset that I will never be able to achieve the career I want for myself, that I will never have the life I want for myself and nor will my children.
But obviously none of this is enough. I should be shelf stacking and filing so that my pittance of £53 a week is then deserved. I am horrified at the lack of thought behind some of these posts.
I am also horrified that people on benefits are often thought to be lazy scroungers. It is offensive. I would give anything for my two children to have no disability and me be able to work and have a career. Unfortunately though, life hasn't worked like that, so I have to stick with being a lazy scrounger.

I'm just marking my place here, only read to pg 3, will come back later, read the rest of the thread, and reply then. Don't know how I missed this one!

The debate was not mostly about those with disabled children. It was about in general making those who claim benefits do some unpaid work for those benefits. A lot of people in the UK support would that principle.

No, Xenia, that was established earlier on, you did however suggest that some of us could do something on a voluntary basis whilst someone else looked after our children.

Xenia, you were saying
"If we did deem it best for everyone that those in receipt of benefits work then you would need for example to swap the parents of children with the same disability or have them looking after two at once or whatever. The concept would be that no benefit was provided unless you did at least some work for it."

Unless I did at least some work for it? Because I don't do enough work for it already?
What about people who have their wages topped up by benefits? What about people claiming child tax credits and working tax credits and child benefit, should they also "at least do some work for it"?

Carers (including parents of disabled children save the country £17 billion a year, we cannot afford, as a country for everyone to work.

I have said it before, but will repeat myself, if it wasn't for the unemployed neighbours and SAHP's, most of the care packages given to adults wouldn't be enough and would cost more, even picking up the health bill for the accidents/effects of forgotten medication etc.

The giving of welfare benefits is the cheapest way to run our country (and of course keep the rich, rich). Enough was/is given to keep the masses going, but just under the level that would make real changes.

Apart from schooling and access to a holiday club that all NT children can use but with a named worker, mine don't even get a care package of any kind. This is unlikely to change: even when ds1 put ds3 in A&E over half term adn I messaged our SW for help the only reply we receiv ed was what a shame but hope things are good otherwise.

Given ds1's aggression there is a tipping point in terms of poverty / risk for the otehrs at which we would start to chase residential (probably a boarding school): this would cost tens of thousands. Far more than me being at home doing to constnt (and I do mean sonstant, can;t even have a door closed between us if other boys about) 1-1.

If it's childless people or people with an older child at school doing some appropriate (becuase if it is going to help with their CV it should be ) work that crucially DOES NOT take up what could otherwise become paid work then I am theoretically fine with it (to an extent- a few hours a week fine; the current system where people work but get no protection if they want a lunch break or to use a loo- no). I do think that aboce a few hours someone should be given minimum wage rather than benefit rate though. Wouldn;t cost the country given that the claimant would see their HB etc drop as a result- that is how the system works after all- but would send a strong message about value.

BlueBalloon hugs; I also have two with diagnosed disability, oone with SEN and another being watched: of course it is one CA per family so same rate. Like you I have had my suicidal moments but could never do that to the boys; and like you every penny would be gladly given up if only there were a cure. I worked before; I was studying to teach when the boys were diagnosed. An ambition I have had to give up as they all ahve different isets (4 different schools) and I could not manage the commute which is significant to where I would have done the PGCE. I don;t see work as a penance though.

Xenia I don't know why you surprised when benefits debates go this way- if you are a choice claimant then either you are fine with taking even less and probably set up with a HA house etc, or you can choose to break out (or at elast give it a shot in the current amrket). Those of us stuck are the ones who cannot do that and didn't want this life so we are the ones feeling scared and vulnerable. Especially with posts like whatmeworry's which is probably mwant absolutely harmlessly yet to me conveys the same threatening undertones that mean I no longer watch the news or read papers any more.

Peachy, hugs to you too. I get so sick and tired of people who are able to work and have healthy children treating me and the way I HAVE to live as a choice! There are no choices for me. If I could choose, I would choose to have both my children born without disability. I would choose to have a job in the field I studied in and be earning a decent amount of money and saving for a pension and I would sincerely hope that I would not be one of those people looking down their nose at others and grouping them all into one category!
As it is now, my future worries me, my childrens futures worry me, I have very little money and my living conditions are FAR from ideal.
This is not the life I chose but it is the life I have to live, as do many other carers.

f we did deem it best for everyone that those in receipt of benefits work then you would need for example to swap the parents of children with the same disability or have them looking after two at once or whatever. The concept would be that no benefit was provided unless you did at least some work for it."

Xeina

Well check your facts start with anyone getting carers is actually working it is classed as a income when they look at anything else including respite!!!.

And then what do you suggest people do when quite often their dc need 1-1 anyway or in soem cases 1-2 and if you look ater anyone child even for avours that now classed a schildminding

"f we did deem it best for everyone that those in receipt of benefits work then you would need for example to swap the parents of children with the same disability or have them looking after two at once or whatever. The concept would be that no benefit was provided unless you did at least some work for it."

On the same note as THC, (i personally wasn't going to try to explain it to someone who obviously doesn't have a clue).

You would have to provide another carer if hoists, unexpected hospital trips etc were needed. You would have to provide accomodation big enough to make this feasable.

I would recommend to the likes of Xenia to study social policy, from the 19th century. You will then see why you are talking claptrap. We started to pay people to stay at home because it is cheaper than any other provision, even workhouses.

Welfare provision was started to have an army fit enough to fight and people to work (to make money for the already wealthy), as they were on starvation wages. Look up Rowntree's study, at least.

Tilly

No ds3 can not attend after school clubs as no transport is provided . Plus the fact he leaves at 7.30 does not get home till gone 4.30

Even when at a nearer school he could not up to afterschOol clubs as they are run volunteer so noone was or could be forces to help ds3