to think that the sad facts of Ivan Cameron's life and death do not exempt Cameron from criticism for his government's policies. [Titled edited by MNHQ to correct spelling of Ivan Cameron's name]

[nippiesweetie]

Again, today during Question Time he uses his son's disability and untimely death to close down discussion on a matter of disability.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/15/welfare-reform-minister-disabled-not-worth-minimum-wage

"We know people may not intend to imply dishonesty, but the many accusations of 'manipulation' or 'using' his child's death do read like this to us. It's also massively discourteous and rude - imagine how any of us would feel, as parents, if we had lost a child and were accused of deploying our child's death to manipulative effect? Surely it's not an accusation any of us would be prepared to put up with?"

But it's not about accusing him of being dishonest, if he uses his personal experiences to stop criticism or questions about policy...then they have to be open for discussion.

Otherwise you end up with a prime minister that can't be questioned on certain matters so that the other party isn't being discourteous or rude.

I don't think it is rude to say, well with all due respect to your experiences and the grief of losing a child - I don't think that means you will automatically have better policies than another political party or that your ministers can say what they like on certain matters without facing the same criticism as any other PM or party leader does.

@KneeQuestion

We think any political criticism can be made effectively without accusing him of using his own child's death for manipulative or dishonest purposes

But he is using mention of his experience of being the parent of a child with disabilites, to shut down debate on his governments policies that affect people with disabilities and their families.

That is manipulative.

Of course he was/is affected by his experience, but the policies of his government that are making disabled people suffer, are an indication of how very out of touch he is with the experience of the average person.

At the risk of being massively over-specific, saying that he uses 'his experience of being the parent of a child with disabilities' is one thing - saying that he uses his son's death to do xyz is something else.

yes, i agree, he is being manipulative. He has experienced how dreadful it is to be the parent of a disabled child and to lose that child as a rich man but it would have been a hundred times harder every inch of the way as a poorer person with no influence over the nhs. i bet they all bent over backwards for him.

@tabulahrasa

I don't think it is rude to say, well with all due respect to your experiences and the grief of losing a child - I don't think that means you will automatically have better policies than another political party or that your ministers can say what they like on certain matters without facing the same criticism as any other PM or party leader does.

This isn't something we'd delete, though (so we agree it's not rude)

I completely agree with Rowan and I think some of these comments about cameron supposedly using Ivan's death in a cynical way are completely out of order.

David Cameron has my deepest sympathy for the difficulties he had with Ivan. To use an old-fashioned word though I find it a bit unseemly that he uses this experience to counter criticism.

@SurelyCurly

yes, i agree, he is being manipulative. He has experienced how dreadful it is to be the parent of a disabled child and to lose that child as a rich man but it would have been a hundred times harder every inch of the way as a poorer person with no influence over the nhs. i bet they all bent over backwards for him.

Tbh (if we're getting into the business of parsing posts) this is a bit closer to the line. The practical experiences may be (almost certainly are) easier if you're wealthy, but it's not really on to imply that someone's distress at their child's illness or grief over their death is made '100 times easier' by money, is it? And we realise that that may not have been your intended implication but it is one possible reading. Tbh is would be really helpful, among other things, if people could read back over what they intend to post and check that they're being really clear about what they intend to say.

So is it a language thing then...if we write using an experience instead of drawing from an experience there's the chance someone will infer that it's in a lying calculating way rather than just meaning that he mentioned it as being relevant?

In that case, the OP in my opinion is NBU to think that any personal circumstances of any politician should exempt that politician from criticism.

Sorry the personal not any. didn't read it before posting
Oh and should not exempt

Rowan I think that you will find that politicians need Mumsnet, or at least want its platform, more than Mumsnet need politicians.

Out of interest why do you always delete threads rather than simply freezing them with comments disabled? People who were interested could read them, you don't have to monitor them and they will fall down the pages very quickly.

@tabulahrasa

So is it a language thing then...if we write using an experience instead of drawing from an experience there's the chance someone will infer that it's in a lying calculating way rather than just meaning that he mentioned it as being relevant?

Language is important but it's also about the specific charge of using/manipulating his child's death - which your post didn't make.

As ever on MN if we think something is carefully thought out and is making an important and well-reasoned point we'll try really hard not to delete. (Sometimes we do have to anyway though.)

ConferencePear unseemly is a good word.

@nippiesweetie

Rowan I think that you will find that politicians need Mumsnet, or at least want its platform, more than Mumsnet need politicians.

Out of interest why do you always delete threads rather than simply freezing them with comments disabled? People who were interested could read them, you don't have to monitor them and they will fall down the pages very quickly.

Our position is really that threads are either up and available for posting on, or down and not available at all. Otherwise it seems like an invitation for people to start a new one to discuss the thing they're not allowed to discuss on the frozen thread. We do suspend threads sometimes but usually only because a mighty bunfight is occurring and we need to stop people telling each other to fuck off while we work out what's going on.

Blinkered seems very fair too

In my opinion Cameron takes away from ppl with disabilities because they don't have the support of the right wing press. Gordon brown list his daughter Jennifer t cot death I believe but didn't use that t shut down questions.

IMO DC is using his specific experience in caring for his son Ivan and unrealistically applying that experience to everyone that has a child with disabilities. I feel that he does not think (nor make the effort to educate himself) about the vast differences that people in other circumstances (especially financial) are experiencing and therefore comes across as unfeeling about people with disabilities, perhaps because he simply does not apply the logic that other people's situations can be much different.

I also think that as he has (sadly) not had the experience of his son growing to adulthood, that he does not realise the scope of failings in the support available to those in the young adult age group for disabilities. I suppose that it's possible that even had Ivan grown to adulthood that, due to his finances and privilege, DC may still not have understood the differences because he has not directly experienced the level of financial struggles and battles with the NHS that many deal with regularly. Obviously that is something we will never know.

I don't like to see him using his personal experience as a carer to halt what may be beneficial to others who are still in a caring capacity or those who are in need of support. The very fact that he was a carer/parent of a child with a disability should encourage him to want to educate himself further in what type of struggles people in this situation are having and find ways to help and support them. Sadly, this doesn't seem to occur to him.

One would want to think that being a carer for his son would teach him that every life is important and needs care and support. Sadly, this doesn't seem to have occurred to him either.

In short, I don't think he is using his child's death to manipulate anything. I simply think he is not using his child's life (and his experiences caring for him) to spur him on to make sure support is there for others. He's not only letting down the disabled, he is letting himself down.

Hello! What do ppl think about the name adaline? Ada for short?

Sugar! Thought I had started a new thread! Sorry. Will try n delete!

So, the death of your disabled child is only really tragic if you also struggled financially during their life?

Gosh. That, to me, is just as offensive as those people in the media who talk about severities of rapes. The loss of a child is devastating, no matter what. Disgusting.

Of course not. What a silly thing to say. Nobody is saying his death was not tragic at all. Where in the world are you getting that idea from??

"So, the death of your disabled child is only really tragic if you also struggled financially during their life?"

No of course not!! Nobody is saying that!

What people are saying is that if you are rich there are many things you can do to make the life of your disabled child better, and your own life as a carer better, and which means that you can't really empathise with somebody in the same circumstances, but who is scared to turn the heating on in case they can't pay the bill.