Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To be terrified about PIP?

1000 replies

BobbyBiscuits · 29/04/2024 15:10

I've tried to blank all this out for ages, but today it hit me when the government basically are saying I'm going to (they want me to) have my PIP cut off?
My main illnesses are severe depressive disorder, general anxiety disorder and severe anorexia. I've severe PTSD symptoms and also think I may have ADHD but have not been able to get diagnosed due to phobia of MH services since I got sectioned.
I now have physical symptoms also and severe osteperosis which I put on my last forms. But had no assessment for several years.
I'm praying this is BS from the Tories and they can't do it anyway as they'll be kicked out.
Or could labour still continue this assault against disabled people?
It would halve my already tiny income, other half is from ESA, and they could kick me off that too even though I can't do anything!?

What do people think?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
NamechangeForthisquestion1 · 30/04/2024 16:00

Brexit by any chance?

TigerRag · 30/04/2024 16:02

"Genuine cases will always remain covered and pp have nothing to fear."

You've never had a pip assessment have you? They do them to stop people claiming. Money is then wasted on tribunals

GoodnightAdeline · 30/04/2024 16:02

NamechangeForthisquestion1 · 30/04/2024 16:00

"We are not one of the richest countries in the world. We’re number 30(ish)."

Wonder why that is 🤔

Long list.
Tory mismanagement
Brexit/covid
general first world decline
high unemployment
shit infrastructure
needy and unhealthy public
being unable to cream off second and third world countries like we used to

Noras · 30/04/2024 16:04

Personally if people resent paying PIp for my adult son to facilitate a PA to take him to the cinema then I resent anyone claiming child benefit taking their children on holiday or to the cinema or zoo. Why am I a tax payer paying for kids to go to the Zoo - that’s a luxury. Why am I paying benefit to people with upwards of £120,000 combined income. I hope anyone begrudging a disabled person’s trip to the cinema has never claimed child benefit and gone on holiday.

NamechangeForthisquestion1 · 30/04/2024 16:07

@GoodnightAdeline we could make big changes in our economy by rejoining the EU. This would be a great start.

Boomer55 · 30/04/2024 16:10

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 15:33

I've looked it up thanks!

It's still a luxury. One that you are being supported to access through state funding due to your disability. There are millions of people that don't drive and therefore can't access locations that aren't on a public transport network without using a taxi. They wouldn't receive funding from the government to pay for their taxis because they aren't disabled. By your definition, taxis aren't a luxury for these people too so why aren't they given money to pay for the taxis? Because it would become unaffordable and taxis are considered a luxury.

I am not by any means trying to suggest that you shouldn't be funded to use the taxis by the way, although I do wonder where most of the population would draw a line on reasonableness in cases like this. I expect almost everyone would want to fund taxis to hospital appointments but what about 'unnecessary' journeys? The cost of taxis would make long journeys incredibly expensive so when would it be deemed excessive? It is very hard to draw the line.

Look, my GP is a mile away. I cannot walk, I cannot use a wheelchair or scooter, and I cannot walk as far as the bus stop.

How do you suggest I get to this non luxury appoinrment?

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 16:10

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 14:21

I also think that 'quality of life' in itself a bit of luxury term. Nobody cares that there is a significant proportion of people in the UK that aren't disabled and don't have the time or money to be able to properly consider their quality of life. They are instead expected to care for our vulnerable and do the often very hard jobs that nobody else wants to do and get paid peanuts for the privilege. There are no cinema trips or taxi journeys for them and yet they are just supposed to accept their lot.

On this point though about taking taxis. People that are not disabled don't need to get taxis. Some disabled people have no choice.

Boomer55 · 30/04/2024 16:13

Willyoujustbequiet · 30/04/2024 15:43

They clearly don't. They can't grasp the definition of a necessity. Oxford lists it as "a state..of being required" and "a situation enforcing a course of action".

Seems pretty clear to me.

Perhaps they want you to teleport?

Like Mr Spock? Teleport and then announce “it’s life Jim, but not as we know it”…😷

societies · 30/04/2024 16:13

GoodnightAdeline · 30/04/2024 09:06

A gardener is totally unnecessary, sorry. The entitlement of what the state should provide is wild.

Gardener should be provided by the Council. They have the budget from this, from your (subsidised) Council Tax. The local Council is also best placed to know who really needs their help and who is ok-ish.

Fresh1ndia · 30/04/2024 16:24

So to get this straight- posters are saying disabled people should not have help with mobility and getting to places?

Boomer55 · 30/04/2024 16:27

This whole thing is just a nonsense. The Tories know they are finished for now. To minimise loss they are thrashing around shouting about benefits, the rubber boats, defence etc.

What Labour do remains to be seen.

But, the Tories won’t be in power long enough to do anything. They are just limping towards the General election.🙄

pointythings · 30/04/2024 16:31

Personally I think that if your only way if getting to where you need to be, e.g. medical appointments, is a taxi, then a taxi is an essential, not a luxury. It's only a luxury if other, cheaper options are available.

Boomer55 · 30/04/2024 16:34

pointythings · 30/04/2024 16:31

Personally I think that if your only way if getting to where you need to be, e.g. medical appointments, is a taxi, then a taxi is an essential, not a luxury. It's only a luxury if other, cheaper options are available.

Of course it is.

ArchesOfsunflowers · 30/04/2024 16:34

It’s eye-opening for me to see how people view luxury on this thread. Totally back to front thinking. The item before the person.
I’d honestly always viewed that disability benefits were simply to enable someone to lead an average life/ a life of a reasonable standard. Not a Spartan existence that is the lowest for survival and at a level to destroy mental health.
So that does include for example getting to the cinema, or bowling sometimes. As is typical. Facilitating social contact. Getting to places like the GP or shops. Typical things.
Funding just goes back from that point, eg if social contact needs a taxi and carer to happen then that’s what it needs.
It’s a bit mind blowing how some people think disabled people exist, people without the means to change circumstances themselves. I’m totally and completely fine with society enabling disabled people to have a full and worthwhile life. I’m not going to fucking starve or miss out because some taxis are funded and there’s a young man with autism at the cinema. It’s really, of all the factors that make my life more difficulties, not worth even noting. You could cut disability services in half and it would make absolutely fuck all difference to the economy or our lives. Well… unless you become disabled

BobbyBiscuits · 30/04/2024 16:34

Some stuff on here is sounding a bit dark tbh. People saying about work or not, I personally can't work. But the PIP 'reforms' of which I spoke would affect lots of people, regardless of whether they work 50 hrs a week or zero.
Some people gravely misunderstand the situation. If you have your day to day life adversely affected by your condition, and you say so on your forms and interview, then you're entitled to it, to varying levels. It's not nor should be about one disability or another, it's about what you personally can do.

OP posts:
Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 16:34

Fresh1ndia · 30/04/2024 16:24

So to get this straight- posters are saying disabled people should not have help with mobility and getting to places?

Who has said this?

Tahinii · 30/04/2024 16:35

Fresh1ndia · 30/04/2024 16:24

So to get this straight- posters are saying disabled people should not have help with mobility and getting to places?

Some of them can, if they’re the worthy type of disabled. As long they recognise it’s a luxury!!

3usernames · 30/04/2024 16:39

societies · 30/04/2024 16:13

Gardener should be provided by the Council. They have the budget from this, from your (subsidised) Council Tax. The local Council is also best placed to know who really needs their help and who is ok-ish.

Disabled people don't get subsidised council tax

ArchesOfsunflowers · 30/04/2024 16:41

Here’s an example for the ‘luxury’ idea:

If I were to have someone in my house doing all my laundry, cooking every meal and tidying up after me that is a luxury.

If my 3 year old has someone doing their laundry, cooking meals and tidying the house that a necessity

Get the difference? It’s not the item or thing itself that is the luxury. The luxury is the pampering/ ease or something above what you need.

So similar:
I can walk to work. A taxi is a luxury
I cannot walk or propel myself more than a few metres. A taxi becomes a necessity to get to work.

tocancelthis · 30/04/2024 16:42

societies · 30/04/2024 16:00

Ok, genuine, serious cases aside.

I believe we all agree that the UK, as a country is broken. Doctors are striking, nurses are overworked and falling sick, infrastructure is old and in need of repair or replacement, education, crime and the list goes on.

Today, I read on X a well known senior barrister (KC) saying he loves his job, but it challenges his mental health for which his family have been a steady support so he can continue to do his important job. There are many ethnic minority people who, still not claiming any benefits, have chosen to leave highly paying professions due to discrimination or fear of, the higher up they go, so they choose less pressured jobs, usually working for themselves.

Many people need an annual holiday- funded by themselves- to escape Britain, just to feel normal.

So ask yourself if the society (as broken as it is) can afford to fund all the benefits it does forever, without any meaningful reform to weed out 'some' cases? I don't think it can. So, as sad as it may sound, something will have to give.

Genuine cases will always remain covered and pp have nothing to fear.

Will they though?

In the five years before my mum was diagnosed with dementia - I quote:

ESA assessment - mum on the floor actively fitting, me trying to support her and explain to the bewildered ATOS assessor what was happening (despite the fact that they claimed to be a GP…)

Assessor - ‘but she isn’t doing this every minute of every day is she? I mean surely you could work and just stop, have the seizure and then carry on working? That shouldn’t stop you from a job somewhere.’

ESA again -

Work coach - ‘I see no reason why your mother cannot work, and she legally has to attend a computer training programme where she will learn new skills to get a job, or her benefits will stop.’

When I explained mum couldn’t go without a carer as she was getting lost in her own neighbourhood never mind make a 50 min bus journey alone - ‘that’s not what I’m asking, her work capability assessment says she’s perfectly capable of working, to refuse is ridiculous.’

PIP -

‘Given she is only unconscious for 30-40 minutes of the day 4-5 times a week there is no reason she cannot care for herself otherwise.’

In the end we had to go through tribunal and mum won the maximum amounts - but in that time my mum had very, very little money and zero quality of life, lost 5 stone through not eating (despite me ordering her food off my own minimum wage job at the time). She was permanently freezing cold as she refused to use the heater.

I had to move in with her and stop working. I was told to claim UC, money taken off mum to give to me. Then I was told to apply for CA. Then I was told they’d given me too much UC and I was slapped with a £400 bill. Remember the DWP ringing me and the voice on the other end ‘£400 isn’t that much is it’ - I had £20.

Eventually she was diagnosed with dementia. By that point she was sectioned and yet again, benefits whipped out from under her immediately - you don’t get PIP if you’re in hospital or care. You get the bare minimum. Family top up her money for clothes, toiletries, snacks, music for her room, etc.

It’s absolutely absurd and I break my heart over the fact that my mum’s last few years of awareness were just endless stress and anxiety. How do you block that out?

Quality of life is an absolute joke, it was non existent. I got to the point of five sleepless nights and I threatened something truly awful of sheer desperation - at that point I got help immediately, up to then I was left to it. How the hell do I get that out of my head?

The system is not fit for purpose as it is, it’s awful.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 16:44

It's so frustrating when posters deliberately misrepresent what has been posted.

Nobody has said disabled people shouldn't have help with mobility and getting to places. The extent of this help was questioned, just in terms of there has to be a limit to everything. If a non disabled person can use a train to get from Edinburgh to London for a leisure trip for £20 does that mean that disabled person should be funded the £500 to take a taxi for the same route?

There is also the misleading concept that only the disabled have extra costs associated with mobility and their physical health. At least four members of my family aren't disabled but have mobility issues. One can't drive at all and is too old to learn now (80 plus) and lives rurally. Her husband died so she is really stuck. Another (also a widow) can't drive at night due to extreme astigmatism. One has attempted a driving test 6 times and can't pass (no disability). The other is morbidly obese and would not be able to manage a walk to the local bus stop. Should all of these people have taxis funded or at least subsided by the government? This will be the reality of an aging and sicker population.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 16:46

ArchesOfsunflowers · 30/04/2024 16:41

Here’s an example for the ‘luxury’ idea:

If I were to have someone in my house doing all my laundry, cooking every meal and tidying up after me that is a luxury.

If my 3 year old has someone doing their laundry, cooking meals and tidying the house that a necessity

Get the difference? It’s not the item or thing itself that is the luxury. The luxury is the pampering/ ease or something above what you need.

So similar:
I can walk to work. A taxi is a luxury
I cannot walk or propel myself more than a few metres. A taxi becomes a necessity to get to work.

That's how you have chosen to define it, not what is in the dictionary.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 16:49

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 14:37

Taxi journeys are a luxury for the vast majority of the population. I know families that have to catch a bus to get to school each day and they would give their right arm to use a taxi as it would have a massive positive impact on their life. The kids hate the bus and it's dirty and overcrowded. They are expected to just get on with it!

I am sorry but I don't believe that a £100 cinema trip is the only option for someone to get out of the house. I know it can be difficult when neurodiversity is involved but I just don't buy that at all. Even if it were true, how many times would they have to go a week for it to mean that the person had a reasonable standard of life, afterall getting out of the house once a week surely wouldn't hit the mark? Twice or three times? £300 plus!!! This is completely unsustainable and unaffordable. This is why it's important to be realistic in expectations. Nobody wants to see disabled people cold, hungry and homeless but it's hard to accept that cinema trips and other luxuries are essential parts of life when so many people can't afford them.

Shock horror people take the bus to school! Come on, that's pretty standard! But if you can't manage that? Your DC just don't go school? I take my DD on the train to school. Do I begrudge someone who needs to get a taxi to school because it would be easier if I could do the same? Of course I don't! I recognise how lucky I am to be able to take the train and not have to fork out for a taxi all the time. I did have to use a taxi a few times recently as I was very unwell - it cost a lot!

Boomer55 · 30/04/2024 16:51

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 16:44

It's so frustrating when posters deliberately misrepresent what has been posted.

Nobody has said disabled people shouldn't have help with mobility and getting to places. The extent of this help was questioned, just in terms of there has to be a limit to everything. If a non disabled person can use a train to get from Edinburgh to London for a leisure trip for £20 does that mean that disabled person should be funded the £500 to take a taxi for the same route?

There is also the misleading concept that only the disabled have extra costs associated with mobility and their physical health. At least four members of my family aren't disabled but have mobility issues. One can't drive at all and is too old to learn now (80 plus) and lives rurally. Her husband died so she is really stuck. Another (also a widow) can't drive at night due to extreme astigmatism. One has attempted a driving test 6 times and can't pass (no disability). The other is morbidly obese and would not be able to manage a walk to the local bus stop. Should all of these people have taxis funded or at least subsided by the government? This will be the reality of an aging and sicker population.

All the examples you mention could apply for Attendance Allowance.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 16:52

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 14:37

Taxi journeys are a luxury for the vast majority of the population. I know families that have to catch a bus to get to school each day and they would give their right arm to use a taxi as it would have a massive positive impact on their life. The kids hate the bus and it's dirty and overcrowded. They are expected to just get on with it!

I am sorry but I don't believe that a £100 cinema trip is the only option for someone to get out of the house. I know it can be difficult when neurodiversity is involved but I just don't buy that at all. Even if it were true, how many times would they have to go a week for it to mean that the person had a reasonable standard of life, afterall getting out of the house once a week surely wouldn't hit the mark? Twice or three times? £300 plus!!! This is completely unsustainable and unaffordable. This is why it's important to be realistic in expectations. Nobody wants to see disabled people cold, hungry and homeless but it's hard to accept that cinema trips and other luxuries are essential parts of life when so many people can't afford them.

Where are you getting that figure from? Since when did it cost £100 to go to the cinema? I mean we don't go as it's too expensive but it's not £100! A ticket is like £8?

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread