Yesterday was Holocaust Memorial Day. I'm afraid we're heading that way again.

[garlicblocks]

"It is estimated that close to 250,000 disabled people were murdered under the Nazi regime. Persecution of people with disabilities began in 1933, but mass murder commenced in 1939.

"The organised killing of disabled children began in August 1939 ... All children under the age of three who were suffering from conditions such as Down?s syndrome, hydrocephaly, cerebral palsy or ?suspected idiocy?, were targeted. A panel of medical experts were required to give their approval for the ?euthanasia? of each child. In the first few months of the program this was usually achieved either by lethal injection or by starving the child to death. Many parents were unaware of the fate of their children, instead being told that they were being sent for improved care.

"The first experimental gassings took place at the killing centre in Brandenberg and thousands of disabled patients were killed in gas chambers disguised as shower rooms. Now that a fast and effective method of mass-murder had been developed it could of course be used to exterminate gays, Gypsies, political opponents and of course over six million Jews.

"Worryingly, in 2012 in Great Britain, Geoffrey Clark, a local government candidate for the UK Independence Party in a by-election in Gravesham, Kent posted this on his website:

"Consider compulsory abortion when the foetus is detected as having Downs, Spina Bifida or similar syndrome which, if it is born, will render the child a burden on the state as well as on the family."

"Although UKIP suspended Clark?s party membership when this hit the news, it was too late to cancel his candidacy. He came second to the conservatives with almost 27% of the vote."

What can we do about escalating persecution of the disabled and otherwise 'unproductive' people in the UK? Are we heading back towards forced sterilisation and murder?

True, sparkly.

At least they're honest though.

Saying straight out what the others like them are thinking.

It's always good to know the core of someone.

"I know former neighbours who arrived in Britain specifically to take advantage of disabled benefits."
I simply do not believe this. It's not that easy to get disabled benefits, as everyone on this thread who's actually involved in the process has said. What is the payoff for you in thinking this way, plodder?

Thousands, really? Who told you that? My biggest fear isn't even this government , it's the fact that people are descending into panic, believing all the DM propaganda , and an up and coming party such as UKIP could get at least into a coalition. Things could get even more scary then.

Christ almighty I thought I had clicked on the Daily Mail-o-matic by mistake reading that.

Sad I missed thi: especially the bit about euthanasing someone with alzheimers. I ahd the wonderful priveldge of caring for someone with alzheimers until their death, each morning she ahd 5 lucid moments and I considered myself incredibly blessed to be there for those when I was on that shift. She'd achieved wonderful things in her earlier life, and I feel I learned a lot about compassion by being around her, and indeed 5 minutes a day of the happiness I think she ahd is more than many have.

Also, arguments for such things assumes humans to be an island: people have families and friends whoa re affected and treasure people's existence. Alzheimers is not always distressing for the sufferer- sometimes but not always.

No the word of a consultant is no longer enough, in fact such opinions are actively rejected in favour of assessments on PCs by people who have no real understanding of the condition. yes people are scared: my children have ASD, I am scared, ds1 gets HR DLA now but hits 16 in 3 yeras and they removed the criteria for constant supervision due to aggression so goodness only knows what I will do, be beat up a lot I expect. yes people are dying, in their thousands now according to data.

My husband has a busines, an internet store retailing high end lighting equipment for the stage industry. I get carer's, i don;t feel guilty about that- I have 3 disabled children and worked until diagnosis, in a decent career within the charitable sector. I hope to return this year, although ds3's asd is severe enough he ahs DLA granted until he is 16 so I am guaranteed CA until then- both my boys attend SN Schools.

As for the comment about teh start that 'All mothers who have a child with a disability are currently offered terminations,' are people delusional? Most disabled children's diagnosies are NOT known about antenatally. Many disabilities arise from the delivery itself, later injury or are simply undetectable. We ahd lots of tests for ds3 (excluding invasive ones) as he was high risk for Doen's syndrome, all negative, he ahs Autism.

I don;t yet beleive we are ehading for another holocaust: I do keep passports in date for my childre, husband and and I. I've had enough disability ahtred quite literally at my door banging and screaming to know that my boys are not truly safe from hatred and aggression.

The Nazis did not prepare killing centres as you suggest, Plodder. They had a secret 'euthanasia' strategy which was not enacted until 1939. Prior to that they were sterilising "defective" people and gradually introducing the idea that disabled children were better off dead while quietly killing children in hospitals.

Having thrown out various gory ideas such as shooting "defectives" one by one (abandoned due to psychological stress on SA operatives), tying people together then blowing them up (same problem) and organising train crashes (too difficult), they experimented with the first gassing facility at Hartheim Castle in 1939.

Being remarkably well organised, they had done projections and came in very close to their original target of 70,000 'mercy killings' between 1939 and 1941. A further 180,000 sick & disabled "workshy" were gassed in the concentration camps.

I'm not suggesting the Conservatives have a secret elimination strategy like the Nazis. Of course I'm not. But they must have some objective; this remains unknown. The fact that policy decisions are made in secret, without consultation, does tend to suggest their strategic objective is something they know would be unacceptable in public. I wonder what it is?

Oh and wrt to disabled people working- nyes. DH is classed as disabled but doesn;t claim anything and works; ds1 is looking into starting his own business as soon as he can and luckily for him has a talent that enables that.

DS3 expects to work, he also has a 2 minute attention span safety awareness of a 3 year old and severelyd elayed comprehension, speech and literacy. Nobody is going to employ him, he gets lost on the 3 metre journey from the living room to bedroom for goodness sake. Ask him to push a trolley and he'll be standing in a corner looking at the wall laughing instead.

DD(20) has MS, studying at Uni, wants a job, anybody want to employ her?

I agree, Ken. If someone is actually capable of working, they should be supported to do so.

If they are capable of working.

When they are not capable of working but are targeted, that's a problem.

To use one of my children as an example. My youngest. 12. No sense of danger. Limited communication. Mainly echolalic. Prone to thumping. currently has full time 1:1 school support and 2:1 offsite. Requires constant adult motivation and direction to do so much as write out one sentence. Which can take 20 minutes. Can't be left alone. Has to have everything explained to him in very simple, short sentences with visual backup. Gives limited indication that he understands what's going on around him.

Now, in theory, he could work. He could sweep streets, for example. He is physically capable of that.

What he would need in order to do that would be one person minimally but preferably 2 people to support him, since it's an open space. He would need to be kept safe, since he would not be aware of traffic or how to not get run over. He would need them to constantly direct him to sweep, to prompt him to clear. They would need to get him back on track and manage him when he threw the brush down and refused to pick it back up. They would need to run after him if he took off.

Who would pay them to do that job in order that he could work in a minimum wage job in order to not get benefits?

Physically he could sweep a road but with what he needs in order for that to happen - who the hell would employ him?

yet all he would be assessed on would be his physical capability to sweep. and support would be removed from him for failure to do so.

'suggest their strategic objective is something they know would be unacceptable in public. I wonder what it is?
'

An end to the benefits syetm including in work benefits, workhouses and a return to mass institutions for the disabled (almost ironic as I nursed when the Tories were doing away with such palces)- but the key being mass to keep costs (and quality- we are talking battery farm not free range) down. And wend to the minimum wage so that people are forced to take jobs that do not pay rent or proper food just to survive at all. Probably not a total end to the NHS as it ahs long ahd a function of keeping the workforce fit and also they ahve too many ahnds in the pies of private / NHS care.

I am going to get pissed off if people talk about people with disabilities in a patronising way. Lots of people with disabilities are capable of working and are desperate to support themselves. They face difficulties entering the workplace because of prejudice. This is improving but too slowly for my liking.

It is ridiculous to deny that the benefits system isn't being exploited by some people. They are a minority thankfully but I think they should be exposed because every pound they take from the state is money taken from a deserving person. Having said that the way that people who cannot work are being humilated and then being denied money they are entitled to is disgraceful.
Typical governement fuck up. They invent a system so complex that it can be expolited then use a hammer to crack a nut by attacking the deserving applicants

disabled people ... they should be fighting for proper support in the workplace

Ken, do you honestly think disability groups don't fight for this, and haven't been for decades? Has this support materialised? Not outside the public sector, no.

In case you haven't noticed, there's a terrible unemployment problem at present; how many employers can you think of who'd rather put in special facilities and accommodate flexible working than take their pick from 9 fit & healthy people for every vacancy?

What would you like sick & disabled people to live on while they campaign for a Utopian about-face in the jobs market?

Also- if the key, as IDS says, is to improve the lot for the disabled and get people to amximise their abilities and life chances how come I am struggling to find work, given I have almost completed my MA in Autism and have a long experience of teh sector? The people actually charged with the jobs have no interest in qualified individuals. I did get an interview recently for a grant making trust- who then ahd to withdraw as their funding was withdrawn.

Alsp apols for spelling- glasses off and emotionally invested = typos ahoy

The idea that all disabled people can fight is laughable and shows a very poor understanding of the complexities of the disorders we are tlaking about and the struggles they face.

'Here ds3, fight for your rights- oh yes you can;t speak much in a way peopel can easily understand and can;t really write but go ahead and argue'

Totally agree Peachy. Having a disability is exhausting. We spend all our time striving to keep life as 'normal' as possible. We are lucky that DP has an amazing job but that, together with all the difficulties we face, leaves so little time and energy that even an intelligent, articulate person like him has no time left in the day to 'fight' for his rights.

Also there are get outs. I have been directly discriminated against for being deaf on the workplace. One job cut my pay but they were within their rights to do so as a 'small business' under the minimum size to have to comply with equality legislation, another job disappeared altogether when they found out about my disability, although they dressed it up as the vacancy had relocated.

YY, PPP, happens all the time :(

Just, I must be patronising myself I'm not capable of sorting out my benefits for myself, the fear sends me into a flat spin. It's annoying (to put it mildly) as I used to zizz around in little designer suits, doing million pound deals without blinking. So why can't I follow procedure, fill out my forms and 'fight' for the help I need? Because I have a fucking disability. I'm less able, see, the clue's in the word.

Gah.

"Well somebody has to do these jobs and you seem to have a terrible attitude towards the people who do do them, and I am not in any way suggesting they should be reserved for the disabled over able bodied."

My comment was in direct response to a comment about how:

"They (sic, mentally disabled people) can be given menial tasks"

And had you chosen to read it in the context of the whole sentence, you would have seen my comment that it is bloody hard enough being the mentally disabled person that theplodder was referring to and actually trying to do the every day self-care tasks without then having to go and clean bogs for a pittance.

What I did NOT do, was refer to people who do work as cleaners etc in any kind of derogatory term. Except perhaps to infer that these tasks are, indeed, menial. And, having worked in the past as a cleaner, kennel assistant, hotel chambermaid - they ARE menial, dirty and poorly paid.

As an able bodied adult, I was able to choose to leave these jobs for better paid ones - yet had I been disabled, the general feeling of many is that I should be fucking grateful for being given the opportunity to be paid a shitty wage because I was "contributing" rather that being a burden.

Don't have a go at me garlicblocks If you read my posts properly you'll see I'm not patronising you. I don't like a lot of the language on here and I won't be bullied into talking about ALL disabled people as being helpless because of you.

How is someone unable to dress themselves or wipe their bottoms properly going to be an effective cleaner anyway?

"How is someone unable to dress themselves or wipe their bottoms properly going to be an effective cleaner anyway?"

I'm sure theplodder has an ingenious menial task in mind for them to do, just so that they're contributing to society.

I am absolutely appauled PPP by how you were treated, it's disgusting - and I think that it needs to be addressed. The trouble is, how can you prove discrimination? This is a worry of mine about DS1, who, although Autistic - is very capable and bright and will absolutely thrive and be able to work (in computers if he has his way!). But who would employ him over an identical candidate who is neurotypical? The reality is frightening.

garlic
I should also add that in your OP you describe people with disabilities as 'unproductive.' I seriously take issue with this. That is not the way that a lot of people with disabilities view themselves

I think that's why there were inverted commas around 'unproductive'. Unless I have massively misunderstood the OP.

just< I'm having trouble understanding your points? Am tire though.