To be sick of all the newspaper articles saying lies about DLA and PIP

[elliejjtiny]

To get any DLA or PIP you have to be significantly disabled. To get the higher rate of either part you have to be severely disabled.

A motability car is not free, it's rented. To get one you need to either be unable to walk 50 metres or have a severe learning disability, which is very difficult to get.

It's always happened but since the stuff in the news about changes to PIP it's got worse.

Articles in the newspapers claiming you can get a free car for bed wetting, which just doesn't happen. There will be children like my ds who get DLA because they have a number of problems including bedwetting but nobody gets high rate mobility for bed wetting on its own.

There are other articles about people claiming PIP and DLA for various minor sounding conditions and I am so fed up with it. I know from experience that the newspapers will have talked to people claiming PIP/DLA and twist everything they say to make them sound like a scrounger.

All these articles are giving off the message that anyone with any minor disability can claim loads of benefits.

I really don’t know what to say any more.
Every single post proves how little you know and what an issue you have with autism.

The only thing you need to think about are your appalling comments, of which you should be thoroughly ashamed.

It is horrible. My partner has the same issues too. I have been there when he has had a meltdown and I had to try and keep people away from him. He needs calm, and he just got people shouting at him. I have cautions but he ended up in court over his meltdowns. Was such an awful thing to go through.
Autistic kids seem to get away with it. When you are an adult, not so much.
I wish the best for your DS2.

Sadly, there is no reasoning with stupid. But at least the stupidity, ignorance and spite is, I hope, clear to everyone who reads the thread, so nobody with a brain will take what that person says seriously.

I think it’s very telling that nobody is refuting what I’m saying, instead just opting for personal insults.

I feel this is my fault.
WildFlowers99 explicitly stated that non working benefit claimants are not essential.
I read that as we may as well juts fuck off and die under a bridge.
But I did reply and say that even people on benefits are useful to the economy as we spend all our money.
The irony was lost on Wildflowers as she keeps stating she works with people on benefits. If it wasn't for people on benefits, she would not have her non net contributing role.

THEY will meet their needs as adults. They can choose their environment, workplace, relationships, etc. That’s what adults do. CHILDREN need adults to meet their needs.

There is something seriously wrong with you if you don’t understand the difference.

That's cos you either ignore them, belittle them, or report them

I haven’t reported a single person on this thread so that’s a false accusation.

No. I was not.

If you read my posts I said that I’ve noticed that it almost always seems to be people who are not net contributors who are posting these vile things about disabled people and resenting that they are provided with additional subsidies from the state, because they need them. And that it’s strange that it is people who aren’t the ones paying for benefits in the first place, because they are also being subsidised (receiving more in services than they pay in tax even if they do not claim benefits), who seem to be so angry about it even though it costs them nothing at all.

I also stated very clearly that I have no objection to funding services for non-disabled people who aren’t net contributors. I just find it extremely distasteful that it is usually people who are also net receipients from the state who get so riled up about this when they aren’t contributing anything towards the cost, and are being subsidised themselves. It’s completely hypocritical and seems to be motivated entirely by envy that someone else might be being given more than they are, because they have additional disadvantages so require even more help than we give to non-disabled low earners.

Most people with autism don’t work so it can’t be as straightforward as that? Most people don’t have that level of choice in their life.

On this thread.

But you have on others. That's why noone is directly challenging you.

Because without low paid people, there can’t be higher paid people. The exist in symbiosis - surely you understand this? Both are necessary for the other to survive. The economy by its very nature must have lower paid people and higher paid people, but it doesn’t need people who don’t work at all. Of course if people can’t work then they can’t, but the number of people who ‘can’t work’ is now so high that it’s stifling the economy and we can no longer afford the benefits.

Nope, I have reported none whatsoever. I can’t prove that to you, but you’ll just have to take my word for it. If there is a way of proving I would be happy to screenshot?

These children have always existed. They've always been in need (minus the sarky quote marks). Their conditions simply were not recognised in the past, though. They just got stuck with labels like slow, 'backward', difficult, temperamental. You said something like 'there was no ADHD 70 years ago' in a pp; yes there was, affected kids just used to be labelled as hyperactive or that good old Daily Mail fave, 'just naughty'.

Personally, although overdiagnosis is obviously not helpful, I'm glad that society now has a better handle on these issues and how to help those affected.

Lord knows the justice system ain't perfect, but the idea that violent and dangerous criminals can get a free pass by claiming spurious ND traits is bonkers.

Prisons exist to protect the public, punish crimes and provide rehabilitation in theory at least. Like most public institutions, there are many flaws however, often there are pre-sentencing reports that will help determine the appropriate sentence and suggest strategies to avoid re-offending. How well this works can be debated certainly, but psychological support is part of that process, as is probation, where conditions are applied to help avoid revolving door syndrome.

Rape and VAWG are issues that need a damn site more work for sure, but given the patriarchal structure of society for time immemorial, and the regressive attitudes flourishing on social media, that's another whole can of worms.

People with MH and ND issues, and trauma are over-represented in the prison system as it stands, and the clue is - they are IN PRISON. So the handwringing over ND giving criminals a free pass is particularly ludicrous.

I didn’t say they get a free pass.

But logically if somebody has a medical condition which results in poor impulse control, are they fully responsible for acting on impulse in (for example) assaulting somebody? Should they, in your eyes, receive the same sentence as an NT person?

What a hilarious comment given you’ve done that throughout the thread, refused to engage in any factual discussion, and now are throwing hateful unscientific nonsense around.

I think you’ll find people have simply decided it’s not worth bothering, and that they’d have more chance of a rational conversation with the mouse in the article that I posted a link to, despite it having had part of its brain removed.

You appear to be having problems with reading comprehension.

Thanks.
I really agree with what you've posted, both here and on other threads. (And relate to a lot.)

But I also have concerns about all this stuff and wish it didn't become so "them and us" and we tried to understand each other's POV. It's all a bit like Brexit in that respect.

I'm probably not explaining very well.

Bound to be some crossed wires with us autistic people trying to debate with NT people as well as each other!

You reported me dude 🤣

And proudly announced it!

What's appropriate "in my eyes" is utterly irrelevant as every case, every situation and every offender is different. That's why there are professionals who make those decisions and have access to all the necessary information. I don't. I have found, as I've matured, that my opinions or thoughts or feelings are mine alone, and as I don't know everything, setting such things in stone is a pointless exercise, because there is always more to learn. Unlike some people.

I agree. I feel I’ve been hugely paraphrased and misrepresented on this thread - I’ve taken a huge number of entirely false accusations, had words put in my mouth, been subject to personal insults. I’ve backed up everything I’ve said about the affordability of disability benefits with figures. People aren’t interested - they’re hugely emotive about this topic and fly into a rage if you don’t agree with everything they say.

I haven't got the stats to hand, but there's a huge gulf between the amount of autistic people who want to work, and who are actually employed (and many of those are underemployed).

As a whole, autistic people aren't wanting to stay on benefits, but struggle to find suitable roles, work enough hours to make ends meet, or can't work at all around coping with everyday life. They are not simply choosing not to work.

I feel that’s a bit of a cop out answer.

Technically professionals have decided to place biological men in women’s prisons. So their judgement isn’t everything.