Upset by way govmt is managing disability benefits change

[Rosie8880]

The narrative government is sharing about disability benefits changes is upsetting. They speak about the ballooning of claims & how this is unsustainable. Isn’t this connected to the collapse of NHS, waiting times and people awaiting for diagnosis, unable to get treatment. The most vulnerable people in society are being impacted and there are other ways to bring in income // reduce spending (Tax wealth, and by wealth mean multi millionaires/ rather than poorest in society). This is not the way. Like to hear about those that are impacted.

They said under 22 so DLA will be affected, there's lots of families on the Contact group that are not happy because dla is under the age of 22.

I followed it fine, thanks. (But if I hadn’t, that would be a cognitive deficit, and you’d be attacking someone based on a disability.) My point was that you attacked that poster as if she’d done something wrong, but she was merely clarifying and correcting a factual inaccuracy. Your vitriol is not justified towards either her or me.

It’s obvious that the nhs is failing people and they can’t get the care and treatment needed. As you say PIP is often spent on things like cleaners carers therapy etc which shows a clear issue in the social care area. If the nhs and social services were fixed the benefits bill would reduce naturally.

I completely agree with this. A massive reason for the rise in claimants is underfunding of the NHS, and the government shows no real intent to fix that in a meaningful way. It’s all very well to try to cut money to claimants, but what are they supposed to do if they have exactly the same problem, no medical treatment (or therapy), and then no money for aids or care? Such a dereliction of duty. Many people wouldn’t need to claim if the NHS was functional.

They’ve also totally ignored long Covid as a factor in rising claims, and they make no significant mitigation efforts in terms of stemming the ongoing, rising numbers of people still contracting Covid and developing post viral symptoms.

I'm scared too. I'm also at the point of feeling deeply ashamed that I have an illness that prevents me from working. I've attempted voluntary work for a few years but the most I can do is 1-2 hours a week and even that not consistently.

I know many people play the system and something has to give. But taking pip away from all but the most incapacitated people and expecting everyone else to somehow be capable of work regardless of being clearly unwell/in severe pain is not the way. Who the hell is going to employ us anyway?

There will be a lot of suicides and I understand why. I might be in that position myself.

People rubbing their hands together at this news have no understanding what it is like to be so genuinely unwell and desperate to work but having a body or mind that won't cooperate.

I'll probably get flamed for this but I think it may have been better to reduce the amounts for all rather than the current propositions that will exclude large numbers from getting PIP at all as well as potentially losing the LCWRA element of UC as well. Better a reduction for all rather than a million being plunged into poverty overnight. I do appreciate many are not getting the highest rates, but with so many on the lower daily living rate being at risk of their awards being stopped altogether and with so much else depending on daily living ( carers allowance, severe disability premiums for older people etc) it does need a rethink as to how best to reduce costs. Sorry there are no easy answers. I'm sorry but I think giving highest rate mobility £75 a week to people unable to leave the house due to anxiety seriously needs looking at.

I do think things have spiralled out of control, and I personally know people who are claiming disability benefits that don't really need them. So I am on board in principal with the idea of tightening up.

My concern is that the instruments that the government is proposing to use in order to achieve this are simply too blunt. The points-based scoring process doesn't allow for nuance or for individual differences, and reduces people's complex needs to faceless numbers. The fear is that people who genuinely cannot work but don't tick the boxes for whatever reason will slip through the net. What will happen to those people? We don't yet know.

We ideally need to have a proper assessment process which looks at individual needs and abilities at the start of the process. Failing that, at the very least, we need a functioning appeals process that can override the points based assessments for those who evidently can't work but don't meet the standard criteria.

You're not the only one. I manage to do some artwork, but I can only spend a handful of hours a month on it, and I can't even guarantee I can do that.

If starving me was going to make me well enough to work, it would have happened by now. It's actually only made me more sick and less capable.

I really hope you don't get to the point of feeling suicidal. I'm sending you a massive hug x

If I was healthy, lost my job and couldn't find another, it would be in my interests to persuade people I was unwell with something, just so I could actually survive. I'm not saying that people are doing that, but it makes logical sense and I would find it hard to blame someone for doing that, given the pittance job seekers are expected to live on.
THIS! Universal Credit as a single person is unliveable on. It made my blood boil when they increased the amount for people needing to claim it during Covid - they KNOW no one can survive on the basic rate! I totally understand why people who lose their jobs might go after disability benefits. People have to survive somehow.
Add to this that “Job Centres” are not fit for purpose. My DP was briefly out of work years ago. He went to the job centre, thinking they would help him find work, or even access training as he wanted a new direction. Lol. He came home totally confused. I said, nope, that’s not what the job centres do anymore, haven’t for years.

I'll probably get flamed for this but I think it may have been better to reduce the amounts for all rather than the current propositions that will exclude large numbers from getting PIP at all as well as potentially losing the LCWRA element of UC as well.

Not by me, I agree with you.

Why should those who are on the highest rates for very serious physical disabilities have theirs reduced? (Obviously I realise this isn’t happening, but under your proposed, hypothetical plan of reducing rates for all.)

Why should a million still with significant difficulties risk ending up with nothing? The government are effectively saying they can't continue to keep paying the benefits bill at it's current rate. Therefore there either needs to be less claimants overall due to stricter criteria meaning people can no longer get anything at all, or more continue to get it but get a bit less or rates are frozen. As I said there are no easy answers. Do you have any ideas for reform?

There really needs to be a practical thread where people with disabilities or MH/ND conditions can start preparing for the possibility of losing PIP or job searching etc

There’s been some great posts by disabled mumsnetters who work and how they adjust it around their conditions, they might be able to give advice.

I think it’s ridiculous to suggest harming the most severely disabled by cutting their funding. I just don’t see how you can justify that if you actually think about what that would mean.

I would rather see cuts to the least severely affected than the most (obviously I am biased as someone in the severely affected group, here!), but I find it very hard to understand how it can be ethically justified to underfund (even further) those with such severe impairments. I’m not by any means eager to see cuts at all, or at least I would much rather see a functioning NHS so that people with milder problems can see improvements and not need to claim. But I don’t understand how you propose those with severe impairments to survive without a decent level of funding.

@Pelican29 (I also find your suggestion very interesting because it’s actually super rare to see this proposed! Almost everyone acknowledges that at least the most unwell do need decent support.)

I don't want to see this happen but the alternative of is equally terrifying. We are seeing loads of people on these threads who are possibly on lower rates of PIP yet are still saying they are significantly disabled and cannot work. These people( an estimated 1 million ) are facing losing not only PIP payments but LCWRA as well, possibly £1k a month. You want to see cuts to the least severely affected but they stand to lose most of their benefits yet maintain they still have significant needs and won't be able to do any type of work.

How is it equally terrifying, though? I don’t agree that affecting the most unwell is “equal” to affecting only the more mildly unwell.

I agree with you. The people who are severely affected by disability need adequate support, a) because they are amongst the least likely to be able to work and b) because they are likely to incur higher costs as a result of their disability/disabilities than those who are affected more mildly.

As a society, we have limited funds and we need to prioritise. However, I don't think we should simply cut benefits to those with less severe disabilities and demand that they go back to work. We need to put more support in place to help them recover and to help them get back into the workplace. That piece of the puzzle still seems to be missing at the moment.

But a lot of people commenting on these threads whose PIP awards are a t risk are not giving the picture that they are mildly unwell are they ? many are saying they won't be able to find work and will be plunged into poverty with the loss potentially of 1k a month. We can hope that they keep their PIP at re-assessment but with the four point ruling they are thinking they are going to lose their award.

I completely agree. Just imposing harsh cuts and offering no package of meaningful help is incredibly brutal, inconsistent with the (supposed) ethics of the historical Labour Party, and all round wrong. I don’t agree with the Green Paper at all.

No, they don’t seem what I would call mildly unwell. And I don’t agree with the Green Paper or think they deserve to have their benefits cut. But it’s also true there are people who are even more unwell than those commenting, and you seem to think they should have their benefits cut?

I think the solution needs to be a better assessment process and/or a better appeals process.

Very few people claiming these benefits right now are going to say, fine, I don't need them after all, I will just go back to work. They will inevitably say that they are too ill to do so, and many of them may believe this wholeheartedly. That doesn't necessarily mean that they couldn't go back to work if they were appropriately supported to do so. (Which is a big "if", I acknowledge.)

So there needs to be some sort of effective professional assessment, carried out by an appropriately qualified individual who isn't under pressure to meet performance targets etc, to determine whether these people would be capable of work and what support they might need.

Pushing the most vulnerable people into poverty cannot be the solution.

I'm a 'lesser' disabled person. I actually can't work. I would love to, but it isn't physically possible.

There are no adjustments that can possibly be made, unless you can think of a job I can do in bed and requires only the movement of my eyes. If you can, I'm keen to hear it.

Obviously severely disabled people should not have their benefits cut. Let’s just put that aside because it’s not realistic or humane.

Since people are posting on these threads that they’ll lose up to 1k a month and yet are genuinely too disabled to work, does it not strike you that the government proposals may not be the correct course of action?

There's no vitriol stop being a drama llama

It's not necessarily a cognitive impairment not to follow a conversation, quite often it's just a lack of bothering to follow the conversation.

It's pointless trying to have a conversation with people who are here to only be goady.