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
SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:42

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 18:15

No they didn't. I said that it was absolutely undisputed that disabled people should be able to use taxis for medical appointments. I said that due to the cost involved there may be a point where some 'unnecessary' journeys might be considered excessive by some. I never suggested that this included all other journeys or even what this excess might look like, other than the Edinburgh to London example.

So once again, nobody has actually written what you think they have. You have taken a post and misinterpreted so that it suits your ableist narrative that you want to project on people that disagree with you. It's hugely offensive!

I know what I read. You suggested that 'necessary appointments' should be funded but not necessarily others. So yes, as you have confirmed you have suggested disabled people should not be able to travel by taxi. I find your gas lighting highly offensive!

Willyoujustbequiet · 30/04/2024 18:43

XenoBitch · 30/04/2024 18:28

I saw that too.

I know a lady who can barely walk (so can't use buses), use a taxi at great expense to get to her own sister's funeral.

Yes someone did say it.

The bigotry on this thread is shameless.

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 18:43

Pin0cchio · 30/04/2024 07:25

Boomer im not questioning that but its pure numbers, the "boomers" are a large generation not currently paying NI and unless you are very wealthy the combined cost of treating your health, paying your state pension, giving you a free bus pass, winter fuel etc is likely less than you pay in tax.

State pension was never a funded system. The presumption is its funded by the working generations.

So you don’t think that the baby boomers who worked and paid NI all their lives should be entitled to state pension now ? If the presumption is that previous working generations have funded the pensioners of their time, how are baby boomers any different now it’s their turn ?

Willyoujustbequiet · 30/04/2024 18:44

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:42

I know what I read. You suggested that 'necessary appointments' should be funded but not necessarily others. So yes, as you have confirmed you have suggested disabled people should not be able to travel by taxi. I find your gas lighting highly offensive!

The backtracking is fun though.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 18:47

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:42

I know what I read. You suggested that 'necessary appointments' should be funded but not necessarily others. So yes, as you have confirmed you have suggested disabled people should not be able to travel by taxi. I find your gas lighting highly offensive!

Quote the post to prove that I have suggested 'disabled people should not be able to travel by taxi'. It shouldn't be hard to do if it actually happened and I'm gas lighting you. Go on! Not something that suggests there may be some limit, but one that proves what you have specifically accused me of. You won't be able to because it didn't happen. Once again, like so many on this thread you have just inferred something that was never actually written.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:47

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 18:21

Again, I never said they did.

Unclaimed benefits are (a pretty substantial) part of the public spending picture. If all of these benefits were claimed then we would have to raise more money through taxation (hard to do) or get into further debt as a country. The third alternative is of course that we cut services and spending which I assume you're not a fan of?

Where did I say you said that? I just suggested that by other people not claiming it does not leave more money in the pot for those that need it as you claimed. But as you have now confirmed yourself that doesn't happen.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:51

Willyoujustbequiet · 30/04/2024 18:28

I didn't say there was.

You said they didn't claim because of morals and pride. So the inference being that those who do have neither. Perhaps you didn't intend it but that's how it came across.

@Bumpitybumper maybe didn't mean it but anyone reading his/hers post surely can see a suggestion of people not having pride or morals if they claim benefits (particular if they have plenty of money.) It is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 18:52

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 15:18

I've just posted why I disagree with you. If you look up the definition of luxury in the Oxford dictionary it has nothing to do with whether the object or service is a necessity. I think this is becoming about semantics and getting off topic.

Do you think not having a disability is a luxury ?

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:55

Willyoujustbequiet · 30/04/2024 18:39

When you're in a hole stop digging.

Quite!

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 18:57

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.

Perhaps you’d like all disabled people to stand quietly in the corner and wait for death so as not to inconvenience anyone. This is a fucking awful thread with some of the most ableist and ignorant viewpoints I’ve see in a very long time. Why MN have let it stand so long is beyond me.

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 19:02

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 12:41

It really isn't the government that's to blame for people's views. The government if anything is jumping on a bandwagon and cynically reflecting a significant proportion of public opinion. We live in a democracy and a fundamental principle is that the government should reflect the views of the people. Unless we want to undermine democracy then we need to understand why these opinions exist and seek to change minds or systems so that support for the disabled and the support they need improves.

Of course, you will always get some ableism but I think attaching that label to anyone that expresses concern about how we are managing this issue is lazy, inaccurate and dangerous. It polarises people and gets everyone's backs up unnecessarily.

The reality is that a quarter of our population is disabled and this figure is rising quickly as we become older and sicker as a country. The idea that we make allowances and offer additional support to the vulnerable in society (children, the old, the disabled) has always been broadly supported but what happens when the proportion of society considered vulnerable grows so much that it begins to put extreme pressure on those expected to supported them. The working population is shrinking and the number of dependents is increasing.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realise that those expected to shoulder this growing burden on top of their own issues and problems will begin to feel the pressure. It is therefore absolutely imperative that we focus on those most in need and we start to be very careful about where help and support is allocated. I know this forum likes to pretend that money and support is an infinite resource but it isn't and we need to accept this otherwise everything will be stretched so thinly that the system will fail. This might be a bit of expectations management for some disabled people in terms of how much society can cushion them from the impacts of their disability. I don't say that out of bitterness or spite but in a spirit of realism. If we don't get real then we may well break the spirit and logistics behind the welfare system that most in the country support and want to continue.

What’s lazy is so many people buying into the idea that the proposed cuts to benefits are anything other than ideological. It’s the exact opposite of the government acting on public opinion. It’s the government manipulating public opinion by vilifying claimants and presenting their own version of why benefits like PIP are unsustainable instead of the truth. Critical thinking is severely lacking on this thread.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:05

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:51

@Bumpitybumper maybe didn't mean it but anyone reading his/hers post surely can see a suggestion of people not having pride or morals if they claim benefits (particular if they have plenty of money.) It is disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

It's not disingenuous. This thread is such an echo chamber it's scary. @SummerBreeze1980 is hardly an impartial person...

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:08

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 18:47

Where did I say you said that? I just suggested that by other people not claiming it does not leave more money in the pot for those that need it as you claimed. But as you have now confirmed yourself that doesn't happen.

It leaves more money to fund public services or perhaps more accurately not too cut them as much as might otherwise happen. Do you deny this? Do you think unclaimed benefits make no difference at all?

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 19:11

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:08

It leaves more money to fund public services or perhaps more accurately not too cut them as much as might otherwise happen. Do you deny this? Do you think unclaimed benefits make no difference at all?

If you think this government will use any of the savings made by slashing disability benefits to better fund public services or to better target those more severely disabled you are utterly deluded.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:13

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 18:57

Perhaps you’d like all disabled people to stand quietly in the corner and wait for death so as not to inconvenience anyone. This is a fucking awful thread with some of the most ableist and ignorant viewpoints I’ve see in a very long time. Why MN have let it stand so long is beyond me.

I didn't say that or imply that.

There is a vast difference between questioning a £100 cinema trip and saying all disabled people should stand in a corner and die quietly!

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:18

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 15:14

Taxis are luxuries. They are expensive, allow people to travel in more comfort than public transport and you don't need to drive yourself. I am genuinely sorry that this is the only means of transport that you can realistically use and I can understand how they feel like a necessity to you. I would fully support you being able to use taxis to get to necessary appointments.

Here we are in black and white. Where you generously said you would fully support a disabled person being able to use taxis 'to get to necessary appointments'. You also understood how taxis 'feel like a necessity to you.'

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:22

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:05

It's not disingenuous. This thread is such an echo chamber it's scary. @SummerBreeze1980 is hardly an impartial person...

I never claimed to be impartial. But your gaslighting is blatant for all to see. I think you must forget we can all go back and read exactly what you have written however much you try and dig yourself out of yourself Ur very deep whole.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:24

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:08

It leaves more money to fund public services or perhaps more accurately not too cut them as much as might otherwise happen. Do you deny this? Do you think unclaimed benefits make no difference at all?

I merely corrected the myth you were pedalling that by not claiming benefits there is more in the pot for those in need. You have agreed with me so why you keep going I have no idea! 😂

Tahinii · 30/04/2024 19:26

A 2 income family can have a household income of £198k and be eligible for funded childcare, I wonder how many are morally opposed to claiming their hours.

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:26

Rosscameasdoody · 30/04/2024 19:11

If you think this government will use any of the savings made by slashing disability benefits to better fund public services or to better target those more severely disabled you are utterly deluded.

Exactly. The ignorance is shocking!

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:26

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:22

I never claimed to be impartial. But your gaslighting is blatant for all to see. I think you must forget we can all go back and read exactly what you have written however much you try and dig yourself out of yourself Ur very deep whole.

So why haven't you been able to find the illusive post that proves that I said disabled people should only be able to use taxis for medical appointments?

I'm in literally no hole. My posts stand because they're not ableist

Tahinii · 30/04/2024 19:29

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:05

It's not disingenuous. This thread is such an echo chamber it's scary. @SummerBreeze1980 is hardly an impartial person...

Echo chamber because many people disagree with you? Your knowledge and understanding of the welfare system is poor and you’re judgmental of claimants. Hopefully you - or your family - never find yourself reliant on the state at all..

SummerBreeze1980 · 30/04/2024 19:29

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:26

So why haven't you been able to find the illusive post that proves that I said disabled people should only be able to use taxis for medical appointments?

I'm in literally no hole. My posts stand because they're not ableist

Keep up! I've already posted it! Wasn't quite so as illusive as you thought! 😂 I have to laugh or I'll cry at this point!

ArchesOfsunflowers · 30/04/2024 19:32

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 17:17

Not in the Oxford Dictionary it's not!

I think the Cambridge dictionary is a sufficient source to define the commonly accepted meaning of a word.
It obtuse and ridiculous to centre the definition of something around your own personal experiences of what you think is necessary or a bit nice to have.

Bumpitybumper · 30/04/2024 19:33

Tahinii · 30/04/2024 19:29

Echo chamber because many people disagree with you? Your knowledge and understanding of the welfare system is poor and you’re judgmental of claimants. Hopefully you - or your family - never find yourself reliant on the state at all..

I have a disabled family member. I have stated this several times on this thread.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.