To think the deliberate targeting of disabled people is idealogical and reminiscent of the 3rd reich?

[malificent7]

Friends and I were discussing the current government's treatment of the disabled and I heard ANOTHER harrowing story. Her friends has multiple disabilities, cannot walk and relies on painkillers to make life tolerable. After her last assessment this woman was deemed fit to work and was told by a non medical professional (AKA administrator) that she didn't need medication. Her financial support was removed and now she has nothing whilst she stages an appeal.

The trouble is the government has scrapped a scheme which got disabled people into work. My good friend's sister has quite severe learning disabilities but was very happy in her job in a café until the government scrapped the scheme. Another thing we can thank Cameron for. She was devastated and wanted to work as it gave her self esteem.

So we have double standards here. We are being told to get jobs or loose benefits yet jobs are being cut.

AIBU to feel that humanity has learned nothing from history lessons at school and during a financial crisis we are keen to scapegoat others (disabled, jews etc.) Seems like most people don't want to help others as 'they work hard and why should they pay taxes?'

Someone will probably come along to say that Corbyn is an anti semite but the Nazis were anti disabled and wanted to squeeze them out of existence. So are the Tories. Is this an example of political gaslighting , cognitive dissonance or projection I wonder?

Remember Theresa May pledged 10 billion to the DUP to prop up her shitty government.

Quite - just think how that could have been used to help the disabled.

Jaxhog that is a BEAUTIFUL example of the way things have already started, as is proved by the poster above with the stats on how small an issue it actually is. You've been told the problem isnt the government cutting so much funding and making everything so much harder to access at all, everything its done is sadly necessary to try and stop the hordes of scrounging faking Jews disabled people that are REALLY to blame.

Quite - just think how that could have been used to help the disabled.

The only upside is knowing it was never going to anyway. This government could be awash with all the money in the world, and we'd still have food banks.

Actual benefit fraud (across all benefits claimed not just PIP) is 0.08% of claimants, so actual PIP fraud would be lower than that the illusion that many, many people are on the take and feigning disability is because of general political rhetoric and the media publicity around the cases.

Instance of disability is also higher nationally due to children surviving to adulthood with illness they would previously have died of, injured servicemen and women and increase in people seeking/obtaining a diagnosis, due to medical advancement and increased understanding of certain conditions

@StormTreader great posts on here

Come on, it's hardly the same thing! No-one is advocating mass destruction of disabled people! I'm also sure that the people who's relatives gave their lives in the last war would be deeply offended by any such suggestion.

The truth is that there is only a finite amount of money and it has to go to the most needy. That means assessment of some kind. Unless you are advocating that we print a whole load more money to pay for everyone with even the slightest disability? In which case, I hope you're ready for a huge rise in taxation.

The truth is that there is only a finite amount of money and it has to go to the most needy

Like the DUP ?

No matter how much money we put into it, we will never be able to support everyone who can't or won't support themselves. The only question is where we place the bar.

Don't forget that the lower we set the bar, the less people will then be contributing towards the cost. At some point we would become bankrupt. Then there would be no money for anyone.

Is it fair? Of course not. But then life isn't fair.

The truth is that there is only a finite amount of money and it has to go to the most needy.

To which our Government seems to have decided means the already very wealthy.

Leaving aside the won't support themselves, you're saying that in your opinion there is not enough money to support all of those who cannot support themselves.
But if someone cannot support themselves, and they receive no support, then what happens to them? They, what, die? And that's okay with you Jaxhog?

"Babyroobs

The thing is how does the government ensure disability benefits are awarded fairly ? I met a lady last week who had metastatic cancer but wasn't terminal enough to get PIP under special rules ( 6 month prognosis). Her cancer had spread to her bones and lungs but was very slow growing and she didn't meet any of the Pip descriptors - believe me I explored every avenue - did she have pain, breathlessness etc affecting her daily living or mobility - the answer was no to every question yet I'm sure she was experiencing increase d costs due to her illness but she still didn't meet the descriptors to score enough points."

Well to be fair, metastatic cancer in itself doesn't tell you anything. It doesn't tell you prognosis - if something is slow growing, you can have a metastatic cancer but still die long after someone who has an aggressive primary cancer. And secondly, if she genuinely doesn't meet any of the descriptors at this time as a result of her illness, as in her cancer does not cause her any symptoms at this time that meet the threshold for PIP, then no, she shouldn't get it. Because PIP is a needs based benefit, not a diagnosis based benefit. The only exception is when a patient has been given a terminal (

We had our DLA tribunal and were awarded high care element and low mobility for our 9 year old.

This was after the initial assessment said no eligibility and the mandatory reconsideration said no eligibility and a wait of a year.

If we had been awarded medium care at the first stage we would have been quite satisfied. So this arbitory refusal of most claims at the first stage results in paying extremely well paid lawyers and doctors to sit on panels, and results in higher pay outs. It causes massive amounts of stress to people already coping with special needs children and COSTS FAR FAR MORE.

Who benefits????

Not the claimants, not the tax payer - it's the people employed to run the system that benefit the most. That finite amount of money is being wasted on wages far far more than being wasted on claimants. If 0.08% of claims are fraudulent- how much more is being spent on trying to prevent this small amount.

The problem is that our system is no longer based on ensuring people have the resources to live a meaningful fulfilled life. It is now based upon ensuring no-one gets a single penny more than they are entitled to - and this actually costs more.

@Jaxhog my grandfather was a prisoner of war, he didn’t get home till well after VE Day and had Spanish flu, he weighed 6 stone.
He was a die hard trade unionist and fought tooth and bloody nail to keep Tories out of government because he never saw an MP on the front line. Do not dare use his service to justify this. If he was alive he would be picketing and ranting with the best of him.

I'm sorry to hear you have had all this trouble claiming DLA for your 9yr old Basecamp. I haven't had these kind of problems but the kind I have had is that I find it very stressful and distressing to fill in these forms, having to think about your children in such a negative way and how able or not they are on their worst day is an extremely difficult thing to do.
In fact we have missed out on years of DLA for our two because I just couldn't find the energy to finish the forms. Now we are about to start the PIP forms as our DS is nearly 16. I am very unclear how he will fair as he will be very unlikely to answer any questions in the negative as he think he can do anything he puts his mind to as that is the way we have brought him up.

For those who are unaware, food banks were introduced under a Labour government

For those who are unaware, food banks were introduced under a Labour government
Yes, but use has gone from some 40,000 in 2010, to over a million last year.

I dislike the Daily Mail and the like intensely, but when they run stories about disability cheats, it’s demonising those who are blatantly defrauding the system, not those that are disabled.

As much as I disagree with the DM’s approach generally, I did a search of their recent articles on disability and two of the most recent were highlighting discrimination against non-visible disabilities.

We had our DLA tribunal and were awarded high care element and low mobility for our 9 year old.

That’s great news and I’m very pleased for you... Obviously you shouldn’t have had to go to a tribunal to get this.

However, I’m not clear how this fits at all with the belief that Tories are Nazi-like (or even worse according to one poster). If they literally hated disabled people and wanted them dead, why would they allow for such tribunals to make such rulings? It makes no sense.

Disability doesn't discriminate you can be any political persuasion and be affected by a disability. That's one of the many reasons for not believing in this daft idea that Tories hate disabled people and have the same mentality as Nazis. Just absolutely ridiculous.

The harsh truth is that there are many more people needing care and as others have said, the bar needs to be raised. If you don't have friends and family to support you, then don't expect the government to.
The general population don't care and never have, until it's THEIR turn!
Makes me angry to know that people who are very ill are made to work.
My brother has never worked because he has 'anxiety' and uses catheters.
He still gets away with NOT having to get paid work, but he manages to do voluntuary work!
The system makes no sense!

I have decided to hide this thread it's too awful

Poisonous in fact and I don't want to engage further.

The truth is awful! This is why it's allowed to happen because people don't want to talk about it.
Sweep everything under the carpet...

Me too Valley. I'm surprised it hasn't been taken down. The OP made an outrageous first post then disappeared. Obviously wasn't interested in an actual discussion. Which leaves then the usual suspects to bicker and outdo each others knowledge of history.

To which our Government seems to have decided means the already very wealthy.

No it doesn't.

chrome-distiller://79c93174-086a-434b-92fc-57401ea76cf8/?time=1792051&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ukpublicspending.co.uk%2Fuk_welfare_chart_40.html%3Fshow%3Dn

You will note the Conservatives are spending more than New Labour on welfare. The amount spent on welfare has almost doubled. The population has only increased by roughly 7 million in that time. How can anyone justify spending nearly £50bn per annum on 7 million people?

Before someone tries to bring out the "muh pensions!!!"

The figures provided are for social benefits solely. The government spent £264bn in the financial year ending 2017. £111bn was spent on pensions.

New Labour made it so easy to acquire benefits, and it was New Labour that brought in ATOS and Labour who, in their last manifesto were not going to abolish means testing either, so "muh tories are litteral nazi's !1!111!!" shows the basis of bad faith these discussions are founded on.

Hi all,

Thanks so much for your reports about this thread - we think it's best we take it down now.