to think if Cameron does this he will be sinking to an all time low.

[threesocksmorgan]

here
surely to god he will not use his son in this manner.

Nothing there for me!

Nothing in that article has upset me. Should he pretend he didn't have a disabled son? He recognises that disabled doesn't mean useless and that their contribution to society is just as valued as anyone else's. He's pleased that attitudes are changing because of exposure.

Isn't this a good thing?

Link doesn't work

what is the purpose of bringing up though?
seeing as the cuts are hitting disabled people so hard.

oh and attitudes?
you mean the fact that disabled people are being called scroungers

He thinks disabled people should be upbeat, support themselves, not complain and not be depressed.

hopefully this link will work

I have talked about my son many times when talking about SIDS, I have talked about my daughter many times when talking about SCBU or genetic illness. That isn't me using my children in any manner, its me talking about my personal experiences.

Ivan was his son, he is entitled to speak about him whenever, or however he likes. It won't be easy for him to talk about at all. I think to say he is 'using his son in this manner' is very harsh.

of course he can.
but he is using him in this instance to somehow make what he doing to disabled children and their family's, seem more palatable.
his government are wrecking the lives of countless families with disabled children.

He is using his Dad too, thought you were linking the dm article about his uncomplaining, cheerfull, hard working Dad.

I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I cannot stand the man, but he is human and I like it when he shows a human side, ie talking about his son.

Everything I saw to report this redefined disability as physical.

Forget autism,learning disability, terminal illness mental health- you don;t count because you can't compete in the paralympics and don;t fit our soundbites.

This is a quote from him: ''as to how the human spirit can overcome any and all obstacles in a ?triumph of the will?. Really? tell that to a parent of a terminally ill child then. Or try and explain it to my son with ASD. You'd have to understand what will is in the first bloody place.

Good blog piece on DC and Ivan here

Now I am not in a place for this atm- had to fill in a dla renewal for one AND a statement assessment form for another yesterday, awaiting genetics results AND had to send my 4 year old disabled child into school badly scratched from my 12 year old disabled child this morning- but that's OUR reality with no help, respite, or input outside school: it's take far greater will power than he'll ever admit to still keep going with 3 disabled children and everything that brings, let alone have to worry about their futures and our finances. The ONLY way I get up each day is with the aid of citalopram, not blinking will power!

Boomer- it's ONLY positive for those who can contribute. In term of economic output anyway, we can contribute in many ways in our lives.

For everyone else (and I work with autistic children and have a severely autistic child myself, as well as two slightly less ASD ones) it's another stick to beat them with.

I know people with all manner of disability who do wonderfully: heck I have AS and am doing my Master's. But it's very simply not possible for some.

Of course the man is allowed to talk about his father and son. But I think it is wrong to use them as tools to gain emotional understanding to accept the cuts he is making.

He is expecting the country to accept that it is not acceptable for millionaires to pay high taxes but it is acceptable for pensioners to suffer cuts and adults and children with disabilities to suffer cuts because after all his Dad could do it as it was called "hard work" "taking responsibility" "serving others"

It would be better and he would probably earn more respect by keeping his family out of his political speeches.

Not that he is the only politician to use a sympathy family value ploy but its wrong nonetheless.

My reading of this article is that he is:

• trying to appear more human by talking about his personal life so as to rebuild trust in the public eye (affected severely by cuts which hit the most vulnerable people)

-trying to milk the Olympics again as that was a success

• trying to say that we all (whether disabled or not) must TRY as hard as Paraolympians so as to compete with other less developed economies (where people must try harder as they won't survive otherwise because there is no social security network). We should be proud that we have a social security network and that our vulnerable people don't have to go through what others do in less developed economies.

Yes we can be inspired by Paraolympians and David Cameron's father but it is unrealistic to hold normal people (let alone people living with a disability) to this norm! Disabled people and children need funding and access to services to help their confidence etc. and skills. And if you have a disability, you should not be made to feel bad if you are feeling down about having a disability. Rather, you need access to others who are living with the disability and services which will give your confidence a boost again so that you are more likely to make a success of your life.

Good post, Peachy.

He isn't mentioning that he claimed all the benefits he was entitled to despite being obscenely rich and privileged due to having money and advantages he didn't create himself.

There are people on MN who don't claim DLA / tax credits / child benefit who are nowhere near DC's league financially. That's their choice and Cameron's was his, fair enough, but his disgusting and sustained attack on the disabled and other people who need support makes it worth mentioning I think.

I would love to know how someone like my dd can use will power to over come her severe disability.
how she will be able to have a future when he is cutting funding to the services disabled adults rely on.
he will have used children's SS, he will have had funding(quite rightly) yet he pretends to understand

Quite simply threesocks his job is to make us think he understands, not actually understand.

We don;t have proper PMs any more (and Tony Blair was as bad on this front)- we have national PR Reps.

I apologise as I only read his comments, I did not notice the reason for him to be saying those things.

...so 'nothing in that article has upset me' was a load of bollocks then. I'll be more careful in future.