‘Game the system’ disability benefits

[Tomatochocolate]

WTF
just read a bbc article about welfare reforms

Apparently ministers think that it’s an incentive to claim disability benefits as the incentive is no work commitments on UC. That claimants ‘game the system’

It’s a long process and really hard to get awarded dla or pip. It’s not just ticking a box that says ‘I’m too sick to work’.

AIBU to think this is just horrific

So we're back to "if they'd rather die they should do it and decrease the surplus population", then.

Yeah that’s exactly what I said, and not hyperbolic at all.

Yes, absolutely this. No one is saying that people with, for example, very severe presentations of autism or with severe, hard to control schizophrenia should not receive state support. Or people with Down Syndrome. But it's also true that we have to consider who, at the more functional end of all spectrum type conditions (including mental, physical and developmental conditions) can cope without state support. Even if it's difficult. Even if they have to pay for their own aids. Even if it's a slightly lower quality of life.

@iwentjasonwaterfalls How is it in any way a meaningful contribution to claim that the people on this thread who are disabled themselves (you know Wildflowers is, she's been upfront about it) are saying this? You know we are not.

A nation where somebody struggling on 24k pays benefits to people on 50k, and is called a eugenics lover if they say it isn’t fair?

@MistressoftheDarkSide I don't think everyone who gets disability benefits is necessarily particularly vulnerable. Vulnerability has become a valuable trait to claim due to the rise of identitarian politics.

"have to stand on our own 2 feet", "it's just something people will have to figure out as individuals"... Sounds pretty Scrooge-like to me. We can go for Margaret Thatcher if you'd prefer?

Agree completely. I know many people who are stony broke because they have a mortgage on a modest property and are just about the threshold for any help. Yet they’re forced to contribute towards a non-means-tested benefit which could potentially be claimed by a millionaire? Hugely fucked up. And given we call 6ft heroin addicts ‘vulnerable’, like you I think the word doesn’t mean what it used to.

I think the send system will be overhauled and it won't benefit children or families. Have a look some recent posts on special needs jungle. The previous government released a white paper with ideas for cuts.

The benefit system will also be cut I think. This was in the news this week.

I am worried about this. My son will need a lot of support for his whole life and more so when I and my husband have died. It's very scary.

I also think that bathe time I retire I won't get state pension. We (the country) just can't afford it.

I hope services/ welfare/ benefits/ NHS will still be around for my son and selfishly if this means that thresholds have to raised I'd support that. There's a world of difference between those who cannot live alone or care for themselves and those who can work, socialise etc and I mean that in terms of physical and mental health.

@iwentjasonwaterfalls lol I'm literally a severely disabled person dependent on care, but sure, sling "Margaret Thatcher" at me because you don't want to have a real discussion.

@Wildflowers99 It just all feels so hollow and dishonest. The "other side" on this thread won't actually honestly talk about it at all? If they're so committed to the current system being perfect, why not stand up for it? But no, it's just insult, insult, insult, "you want to KILL PEOPLE"... so that would be... people like me, then?

@Perzival I think this is about raising the criteria for support for someone disabled, but ensuring those with profound disabilities are better cared for. The support for those with profound disabilities is worse as support has become too thinly spread.

@Perzival It's for individuals like your son that I think it needs to be robust and set at a high level. The support has to continue to be there (and be of a good standard) for those who truly are vulnerable and in need, and I just don't believe that society can sustain paying for people who are not in that position. I wish we (I mean at a societal level, but even on MN) could have this discussion without so many leaping to accuse those who would push for more rigorous thresholds of being pro eugenics, etc. Far from it. Wanting a long term sustainable system is incredibly important to keep the most fragile and unwell people safe.

The current system isn't perfect; the assessment system is corrupt and people who need PIP are being denied it. You're delusional if you think making the system "stricter" will help in any way - it'll mean even more people (maybe even you and I) having PIP taken away from us, and that money will go into the pockets of someone far richer than either of us could ever hope to be, and not into any system that needs improvement.

I mean this used to be accepted. Plenty of people struggle with life. I can't manage stairs for example, using them hurts me a lot. Its a pain if there is a building with lots of stairs and no lift as I can not access it. I need disability support at the airport if you have to climb stairs to get into the plane. I also walk slowly which is a pain and can not climb on a chair or step ladder to do simple tasks like change a light bulb. This all affects me, but I manage. I am rightly not entitled to PIP. But people at the mild end of neurodiversity are entitled to PIP. When in reality you just have to manage. Yes that may mean you can not go to every social occasion or building you ideally want to. It may mean you have to choose your job carefully. But these are friends and relatives who I see working, having relationships, having children. They are functioning normally.

@iwentjasonwaterfalls It's very telling that you fear having PIP taken away from you. I don't fear that. The only way that disability benefits would be taken away from me would be a total collapse of the welfare system due to the voters withdrawing public consent. I am in a clinical category where I am confident that I will continue to receive disability benefits. I don't actually feel anxiety or fear around this, however I do somewhat worry that taxpayers will be driven to the point of total consent withdrawal! That would be a truly tragic outcome for those in most need.

It's genuinely darkly comic to me that you think it should be made easier to get PIP. With what money, exactly, is this supposed to be paid for?

And yet the amount of people getting PIP has absolutely soared in the last few years.

Ooh, go on then. Why is it telling? What does it tell you? I can't wait to hear it.

Exactly.

I’ve given facts and figures as to how benefits aren’t just a bit bloated right now, but wildly out of control and rising rapidly. Not a single poster has actually confronted those numbers, it’s easier to accuse me (a disabled woman) of being a eugenicist or a Nazi. And not a single poster has commented on the fact we have the equivalent of the population of Scotland claiming.

If the system was fair, it should be easily defensible but it isn’t. The floodgates opened when they started accepting claims for neurodiversity and people who presumably worked and coped until that point suddenly got a diagnosis and made claims. Ditto moderate MH issues, in particular anxiety (which virtually nobody was diagnosed with 20 years ago) and OCD (which I’m diagnosed with but don’t and won’t claim for despite being strongly documented). It’s a joke to say I don’t understand disability just because I don’t agree lobbing somebody £400 a month for ‘depression’ who is capable of working is a good idea or remotely affordable.

"Also I would change the system so people could not even apply without the application being approved by both their GP and a consultant. That's one additional layer of professional gatekeeping."

Some people don't see a consultant because their condition is unchanging and so doesn't need hospital medical management.

@JoyousGreyOrca Yes, I couldn't agree with you more. Similarly, there are people who receive full PIP for physical illness and yet they go out regularly for fun, attend large concerts, social clubs, and basically in many ways function normally when it comes to their social life. I am not saying that they don't experience pain and other symptoms; I believe that they do. But society is choosing to make it an option, in a sense, to do this rather than to work. If you can do this then arguably you can work and are instead choosing to have the more "fun" life. Many people would pick this option, and I'm not saying they are breaking the law! But is it morally right...? Questionable.

Can you give some examples?

And as I said, for a genuinely unchanging condition, I would support the abolition of reviews.

But what kind of condition do you have in mind?

I don’t see a consultant because I have ME and there’s nothing more they can do. I’ve been through the ME/CFS service and that’s me done.

Any others?