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.

Just my attempt to convey a comparable level of disrespect and disregard, dehumanising of people, that disabled people are seeing when we're told we're scroungers, liars, cheats, not genuine, undeserving, a burden etc etc.

Got your back up didn't it.

Now imagine how we feel with the endless bombardment of newspaper/online media tell us we're all of the above and any time one of us objects its all 'well if your claim is genuine you'll be fine [but if your claim fails, you clearly were not genuine]' or of course as up thread 'well you'll just have to adapt'.

I've just remembered something. It's been a long time since mine were little but they weren't able to use the 30 hours childcare funding because the special needs nursery was only open 20 hours a week. They can't do the free school holiday childcare for children on free school meals. I wonder how much money the government is saving by not providing free childcare for the disabled children who are entitled to it.

I am absolutely excellent at fighting bears I'll have you know.

I think you've missed the point somewhat - I absolutely agree we all need to co-operate and we need to look after one another.

I am more than happy to pay my taxes for the tons of things I do not use and never will, because thats how modern society works.

But I am endlessly hearing that I am a burden, I am too high a cost, I am a cheat, a liar, a scrounger, people telling me I shouldn't have my shiny car because they can't afford one, that I have more money than them but they work harder than I ever can (assuming I don't work because everyone assumes this on seeing the wheelchair).

So how is that ok... but suggesting that those who choose to be parents should fund their offspring entirely themselves is not?

Yes, it got my back up, because I think it’s a disgusting attitude. Just like the disgusting attitudes on this thread towards disabled people that I have posted many times to defend them against.

I’m not sure why you’d want to get my back up.

As I’ve said, I don’t agree with either of those things, as I think my posts make pretty clear.

Disabled children are entitled to their free hours a year earlier so I doubt they’re saving anything.

Adapt how?

Rachel Reeves is that you?

Mumsnet is very gender critical. Ask the other posters here is they’re pro gender identity, I bet they’re not.

What’s your suggestion to find 5 billion a year then? Just answer the question and smash our arguments out of the water?

Why when this comes up does no one ever suggest sorting out the way people are assessed? I mean people get 0 points and go to tribunal and get enhanced on both. Clearly there's something going wrong. And why are people like me who are never going to grow out of our conditions having to be reassessed?

The way people are assessed needs to be changed

Some disabled children are entitled to 15 hours free from 2 years old. Not all disabled 2 year olds are entitled to it. And of those who are entitled to it, not all can access it.

It wasn't aimed at you specifically @GivenUpOnSleep I thought it was pretty clear the point was it is a disgusting attitude, but people seem to think its OK when its aimed at disabled people ... and suddenly its very much not ok when its aimed at parents/children.

Yes, this.

The appeals system costs a fortune. They need to get it right first time.

I honestly wonder if they use a dice to decide who gets it first time. It's not as if only the most severely disabled get a fair shot and everyone else is disregarded. It seems completely random.

It’s the same with SEN appeals too. The percentage of appeals that win is very high (over 90% in some LAs) yet they spend a fortune fighting, and leaving children unsupported, rather than getting provision correct from the off.

So many of the issues could be resolved if we got things right from the off rather than waiting until things reach crisis point and then trying to fix it. Proper access to early portage and support for parents of children with disabilities could make a massive difference to outcomes and as such mean some children need less support further down the line.

I will answer this when you answer my question that you have been purposely avoiding all day. You've had 8 and half hours to answer it and still haven't done. Yet have been posting on here all day

I actually agree witn this, broadly. (Aside from the implication that autism is a mental health condition.)

I think autism is very poorly defined, compared to what the reality probably is. They're scrabbling round in the dark trying to make sense of it.

I think there are probably more "neurodiverse" people than what is being called "neurotypical", and that changes in society are partly responsible for this becoming more apparent, as the world is getting harder for these people to manage in.

I don't believe there is really a clear line between "autistic" and "neurotypical". I understand there is a diagositc line, but there are people with traits who are on the boundary. Tweak their environment one way or the other and it's more or less obvious. Theres the "broader autism phenotype" whereby first degree relatives of an autistic individual tend to have traits (if not a full diagnosis). These people are on the fuzzy boundary. (In my own family I am very similar in thinking style to a sibling, who is not diagnosed autistic and doesn't have significant struggles in their life like I have, so never would be.)

We need to have a way of recognising and supporting people's struggles and strengths without this sharp line between "fine" and "disabled".

Having said all that, for benefit purposes it doesn't matter what you call it. Before I was diagnosed with autism I had mental health stuff as my basis for claiming benefits. The diagnosis did, however, provide a key to helping me make sense of things and was a big part of managing to get back on my feet and back to work.

When I dared to suggest that people should plan accordingly before having children, and ensure they had enough money to support said children as well as secure housing, I was told I was ridiculous.

It's madness, really. We support people who keep breeding with absolutely no means or intention of providing for the multiple children they have, but I had to lie on the floor for seven hours yesterday until my husband came home, because I fainted off my wheelchair in pain and couldn't get up of the floor. If I had the care I should have but can't afford, because my only income is £400 a month PIP, I wouldn't be in hospital now, having a flare up of my illness, hurt and defeated, wasting NHS resources. At least there's food here in hospital, which is more than I can afford at home.

How do we get an extra 5 billion a year?

Raise taxes. If we want decent services, we need to pay more tax. But Labour isn't brave enough to do it.

The Tories tried to slash the welfare budget. The policy raised less than half the aimed amount and clearly changed nothing in the longer term.

The PIP changes will be self defeating too. Everyone will be appealing the loss of it, for a start. How much will that all cost? Then there is the impact on unpaid carers and the cost attached to that.

You seem very angry.

I wonder if it is because you don't want to recognise that there really are people out there who despise disabled people and see them as lesser beings. If you think there aren't, you are naive. There has been hate spewed on MN, not just "concern" expressed at the size of the benefits bill.

I had to lie on the floor for seven hours yesterday until my husband came home, because I fainted off my wheelchair in pain and couldn't get up of the floor. If I had the care I should have but can't afford, because my only income is £400 a month PIP, I wouldn't be in hospital now, having a flare up of my illness, hurt and defeated, wasting NHS resources. At least there's food here in hospital, which is more than I can afford at home.

I am so so sorry that this happened to you 😔

To get the enhanced mobility component of PIP, you must be unable to walk more than 20m. It's 50m with DLA. When working age claimants were moved from DLA to PIP, many were moved from high rate mobility on DLA to standard rate mobility on PIP.

What if people won't vote for higher taxes?

And that, my dear, is exactly why we 'cannot afford' to pay disability benefits. People are too selfish to consider society as a whole and politicians will not deal with long term financial problems because doing so is a vote loser.

Local authorities are not strapped for cash because of SEN and disabled people. They are struggling because of caring for the elderly - the demographic time bomb that is becoming more and more real. Those who 'tax plan' their estates to avoid elder care costs are at the root of the problem.

We know what to do - set up a national care service like the NHS and pay for it properly out of increased taxation. It's time we stopped being blinkered and put a stop to political 'kicking the can down the road'. Yes, I would vote in favour because it is the right thing to do - who else would?

Thank you so much. Unfortunately it's not the first time and it won't be the last. It could easily be a much simpler process if the NHS and social care system worked, or if PIP was enough to both live on and pay for care, but people don't see that side of things. I'm pretty sure this stint in hospital will cost far more.

Sorry but this is a load of rubbish.

Why should working people struggling to get by be called selfish for not wanting to pay yet more toward people with disabilities, who frankly have more than their fair share.

1% of the highest earners pay 30% of all income tax. We have the highest tax burden since WW2. Elderly care takes the majority of social care from council tax but not by a big leap - mostly it’s something like 60:40.

We have the equivalent of the population of Scotland on disability benefits and many houses get over £40,000 in benefits. It’s a piss take to say we need to give more.