To be confused by benefits cuts to the disabled and ill?

[AllyHayHay]

As luck would have it, I have not been in this position, but I do know of one disabled lady who has struggled. She was incredibly fortunate to already own her own home prior to her accident.

I am not what you'd call politically astute, but I have been reading about the proposed spring benefits cuts and wonder why people always discuss this ONLY affecting the sick and disabled.
I am also aware that there are many, many rough areas with families who have never worked, people who are struggling with addiction, prison sentences (their kids, spouse, etc) and these people never seem to be included in the Guardian articles and opinion pieces online.

Why would a system wish to make the life of a disabled person worse, yet ignore the growing issues of illiteracy, generational poverty and other issues which are going on in most urban areas just out of sight of the comfortably off?
Why not address the reasons that great swathes of people are living on benefits across the UK who are NOT disabled? I imagine this would drag up questions of why those issues persist - and no one in government wants to address that.

Since benefits claimants who are not in work of on the pension are a minority, are these cuts more of a populist tendency?

The Times

@Seymour5I wish they would set this sort of thing up again, not just making sweeping cuts

Any details of better access to treatment?

This is what people seem to have forgotten, particularly when they talk about how easy NT people have it etc. I mean, who even are NT people? I don’t know anyone who can socialise for days on end without any need for downtimes, feels 100% on top of both work and childcare, never loses anything, stays perfectly concentrated on a task for hours and so on. The vast majority of people are slightly stressed and winging it every day, while assuming everyone else is more on top of things than they are so they must be differently wired.

Life has always been hard, it will always be hard. It is easy for a very small minority of people. The notion that all these NT people at work are breezing through it and can’t possibly know what it’s like to wrangle with your mental health on a daily basis are wrong. Basically everyone I know has a diagnosis or has been on SSRIs.

I’m very glad these reforms seem to be addressing the right areas. I do think there needs to be a ringfenced list of disabilities however, I would hate for somebody with muscular dystrophy to be stressing over cuts.

So LCWRA is being scrapped for ALL claims, or just new claims? FFS this needs clarifying.

This. Lots of people who receive PIP, are paying for private treatment with the money they receive. If this is reduced, their issues don't just disappear do they? Will the NHS be able to absorb the fallout, that will inevitably occur?

Therein lies a truly ignorant and ableist post that knows nothing about ND. Seriously you have no idea. Literally none.

How do you know I have no idea?

My point is though that there isn't a widely accepted definitive threshold when a difficulty becomes so disabling that someone can't realistically work. It is very subjective and obviously some of the tests we use currently are in need of reform as the system is unsustainable and unaffordable. The threshold is currently too low so that those who can work don't feel that they should have to work.

For example anyone with an autism diagnosis would be considered as disabled but people with autism can and do hold down jobs and make a massive contribution to society and the economy.

As a wider point, a quarter of people of working age are disabled. Almost half of people over 65 are disabled. By the time people reach 85 years more than two thirds are disabled. Disability is a lot more prevelant than many people think and isn't something that impacts only a small minority.

Because if you did you wouldn’t post such nonsense.

Autism is a protected disability for a reason. You don’t just dismiss other disabilities as something the general population just get on with.

Most MH treatment doesn’t work anyway. I would be interested to know whether spending £££ on MH treatment for people out of work actually results in them returning to work. I’m yet to read about anyone really who has been unemployed for MH reasons who has been successfully treated and returned. This man hasn’t, for instance. 8 years on benefits, presumably years of therapy, and still insists he can’t work.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0ry09d50wo.amp

It’s all still a bit vague even in the Times article which suggests they are still working it out given the backlash from their own MPs.

How can we possibly tell? It’s subjective and all relies on people grading their own struggles. My friend has autism and isn’t disabled. She’s a highly qualified engineer with a successful career who goes to music festivals and spends a lot of time rock climbing.

Science currently has a very basic understanding ND and NT and there is a school of thought that does believe that the distinction between NT and ND is overstated. This isn't ableism but just what some scientists believe based on the best evidence available.

You can bloody tell because the autistic people in need of benefits will have oodles of paperwork such as I listed below. Those that don’t need benefits won’t.

Yes. This. People aren’t separated into ‘NT’ and ‘ND’, it’s far more complicated than that.

They absolutely don’t and that’s ableist and not actually backed up by the protected given to autism in the uk. It is a protected disability for a reason.

I definitely think it's a much more complex conversation than ND = disabled, NT = able.

Like I say, ADHD will be the first thing on my benefits applications because it was the first thing I was diagnosed with - but I've never considered myself disabled by ADHD. I got diagnosed (back in t'day when there were no huge waiting lists!), medicated and then held down a job for the first time ever and stayed on that career path until I had to leave two years ago. The diagnosis and medication is what made it possible for me to work!

It's like a big tangle of issues that all need to be fixed - a very long wait for diagnosis and medication, workplaces that aren't disability friendly, the rush to get everyone back in the office after COVID, some people seeing ND diagnosis as a route to not having to work - and the government have said "right, we'll tackle the people who think they can get a diagnosis and never have to work again" - but in the process, they're also going to be harming the people who want to work but have no medication/official diagnosis yet, would do brilliant in a disability friendly workplace or home working but can't find those jobs etc.

There's no perfect approach, but I understand the frustration when the government is going for the path of most money saving, least focus on people.

@MidnightPatrolthey are penalising every claimant though according to the leaks

The times article still doesn't make much sense.. are they reducing the rate of LCWRA or scrapping it altogether?

Good for her. But it's a spectrum and about 20% of people with Autism work

This is what I want to know! They surely cannot cut LCWRA for every person?

No one on here knows what is going to happen, until they tell us definitively. So their links to this paper, or that, means not much, at this moment in time.

@ChilliLipsNHS talking therapies etc report outcomes if you want to search. It’s closely monitored so easy to find info on interventions success rate