Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To be taken aback this woman is getting DLA?

443 replies

lesley33 · 31/01/2012 23:39

Was talking at work with the receptionist about the changes to DLA and the move to PIP. I am worried about how this will negatively affect some people. However I was taken aback when the receptionist said that she would lose lower rate DLA which she got for depression.

I know she had depression a couple of years ago. But since then she has been in work every day and always seemed fine at work. I know people can be depressed and seem fine, but really if you can manage to work with depression then surely you shouldn't be getting DLA?

Just to say she is a very honest type of person and I am sure wouldn't have lied to get DLA. She hasn't been off sick. And what sticks in the throat a bit is I know there are other colleagues on low wages who have honestly struggled with mental health problems during this time such as anxiety and depression.

And I know you can work and get DLA. I just think if your disability is depression and you can work fine then you shouldn't get DLA. I am her manager so I know she has had no sick leave and there are no special measures in place to support her.

OP posts:
cityhobgoblin · 03/02/2012 14:33

Well said Huntycat

Mists · 03/02/2012 14:36

Thanks for that mansplaination.

Original poster
lesley33 · 03/02/2012 14:36

well said perfect father

OP posts:
CardyMow · 03/02/2012 14:38

I am NOT asking to be made equal to the people still working in my previos profession. I am asking to be made equal to someone on NMW. Which if I take 52 days off sick a year, would be £2,371pa. If I was unable to work, then it should be JSA rates+ an amount to cover any additional needs.

The Government cannot AFFORD to personalise assessments for disability benefits in the way you are talking about, lesley33. In fact, most people WITH disabilities would FAR rather that system was what was being changed to than the ATOS system of being assessed by a firm that has been banned from a lot of American stated for being a 'disability denier', assesses people by using a tick-box form, is not medically trained, is CERTAINLY not trained to assess someone with the particular condition THAT person is dealing with, and wrongly assesses people as fit for work. 70% of people that appeal after being found 'fit-for work' by ATOS are found NOT to be fit for work at appeal.

A more personalised system would allow for nuances like the person who has their parents paying them for the time they take off sick, or those earing £100kpa despite their disability. However, this would cost the taxpayer FAR more than the current system of DLA being a universal benefit for all who meet the descriptors.

It costs LESS to pay it to the person on NMW and the person who is on £36k, than it would to means-test it. And how can you means-test support from family, and at what point would you apply the cut-off? Your mum buys you a pack of therapy balls that cost £28. Would that stop your DLA if it was the only help you got in the year? Do you see why it would be impossible to legislate for that?

floatinglotus · 03/02/2012 14:42

Honestly, perfectfather I think our current economic system isn't fit for purpose and I would be more than happy to see it go down the drink and replaced by something fairer and more compassionate, but that is a very off topic subject for this thread so I won't go into it further.

porcamiseria · 03/02/2012 14:42

yup, harsh but true what perfect father says make sense.

Original poster
lesley33 · 03/02/2012 14:44

I have concerns about PIP.
More personalised assessments may cost more money, i don't know.
I do know when care was given rather than money - not saying this should happen - assessments were individual. I can remember being present at a relatives about 30 years ago and they were asked what family help they currently get - who does your shopping now, etc. So it was very personalised.

OP posts:
CardyMow · 03/02/2012 14:44

If I ever WAS a high-rate taxpayer again (unlikely, given my epilepsy, but I used to be), then I would GLADLY pay higher taxes to support those who have what lesley33 calls 'low-level' disabilities. Can I allocate my previous taxes paid to that? I would be HAPPY to.

It's just GREED that makes those closer to the top of the pile insist that no-one wants to pay higher taxes to cover a civilised welfare state. They are wrong. I would happily nominate my previous taxes, AND any I pay in the future, towards that. Why is it such an unthinkable thing to support those that NEED the help?

ThePerfectDad - you are not 'able-bodied', you are NOT YET disabled. Just remember that. It can happen to ANYONE. You. Your wife. One of your daughters.

I (to my shame) thought like you did until I was diagnosed with epilepsy. Karma is a bitch, and it gets everyone in the end. It got me.

CardyMow · 03/02/2012 14:45

And it cost more money, lesley33. Which is WHY they no longer do that. Be back later.

Original poster
lesley33 · 03/02/2012 14:46

I would pay more taxes for those who are severely disabled actually. Seems like you are still just self interested. The severely disabled do still not imo get the help they should be getting.

OP posts:
porcamiseria · 03/02/2012 14:51

hunty, sounds like you are wishing disabiility on perfectdad?

the sooner they cut universal chid benefit the better, really. tired of the finger-in-ears denial of the fact we are in in a recession

Original poster
lesley33 · 03/02/2012 14:53

Okay huntycat I can see why they wouldn't do it if it cost more money. But I'm still not happy with the present system

OP posts:
IDoNotLIKEFun · 03/02/2012 15:16

There is no way round this. Everyone has their own agenda.

I have seen several MN posts and on the comments of the important disability campaign blogs talking about the reduction in tax credits for children on middle-rate care because although the DC need constant supervision, they happen to sleep at night. Because the criteria for high rate or middle rate are dependant on this.

I read them and sometimes think how bloody jealous I am of the parents whose children sleep for most of the night. I would rather have no DLA for my son AT ALL, let alone higher-rate if he slept and didn't need attending to constantly at night for various reasons. It's very difficult for him and it's bloody torture for me and crucially, now he is almost five I would be able to go back to work and have no need for any DLA. But that's just how it would be for my family.

There are always extenuating circumstances. Some people have more than one child with SN and given the woefully bad access to a diagnosis and to services and support it's not difficult to imagine how some families end up in an impossible situation.

GirlWithPointyShoes · 03/02/2012 15:17

She was NOT wishing disability on PerfectFather. She was just stating the fact that his family is not immune to disability no one is.

He talking about his kids funding DLA yet they could be claiming it themselves one day.

GirlWithPointyShoes · 03/02/2012 15:18

Which makes him slightly more deluded than the rest of us Wink.

CreamolaFoamless · 03/02/2012 15:21

intersting .......I would say if she is working and earning a wage she has no need to claim DLA

I didn't think that was possible anyway?

Are you sure the women in question is getting a salary ?

Kladdkaka · 03/02/2012 15:21

I use my DLA equivalent to buy cake.

floatinglotus · 03/02/2012 15:23

Creamola- have a read of the rest of the thread. DLA was actually designed to help keep people in work.

CreamolaFoamless · 03/02/2012 15:26

there is this menality about if you want DLA you will have to go out and do 37 hours a week unpaid labour or it will stop

I think that's the same for the unemployed?

It doe not give the person a permant income though .....it just frightns the beejeeus out of them

CreamolaFoamless · 03/02/2012 15:30

really floatinglotus DLA is designed to keep people in work ?

I think it was designed to give a helping hand to folk who have paid taxes (and there family have paid taxes) when they find temselves unable to 'work'

PlentyOfPubeGardens · 03/02/2012 15:33

see here creamola.

Sevenfold · 03/02/2012 15:43

DLA IS NOT AN OUT OF WORK BENEFIT

sixlostmonkeys · 03/02/2012 15:49

I think it was designed to give a helping hand to folk who have paid taxes (and there family have paid taxes) when they find temselves unable to 'work'

Sevenfold · 03/02/2012 15:50

children get DLA, my dd does, she has never worked
omg jackbootdadas kids are keeping my dd

CardyMow · 03/02/2012 15:51

I am not wishing disability on ThePerfectDad. Merely pointing out that disability can affect ANYONE. No-one is immune from a future diagnosis of disability.

ThePerfectDad hold odious views. I used to hold odious views, too. Along with my diagnosis of epilepsy, I gained the gift of empathy and understanding. Maybe I feel like it SHOULDN'T have taken my diagnosis to do that, and that I was just alone in being deluded before in thinking that it wouldn't happen to me, and it wouldn't affect my quality of life that much, after all,I had a good career, I had worked hard to get there, I paid my taxes, I paid my mortgage blah blah blah. Now I know that I wasn't alone in thinking like that. And it saddens me that there are others out there as blinkered as I used to be.

At least I had the excuse that I was still in my early 20's. And was still pretty green, tbh. I find it hard to believe that there are STILL people in their 30's or 40's or older that are as deluded as I was.