Ok who wants to swap £2500 a month in benefits for my husbands MS and my epilepsy, narcolepsy and fibromyalgia.

[bluebirdblackbird]

Well according to a lot of people on here we are on a good thing.

the 20 seizures I have in a week, chronic pain and night terrors, losing my memory after a seizure, pissing myself, hallucinations. They are all great fun. Not to mention the amount of times I have been accused of being drunk after a seizure.

or there is my husband. Diagnosed with progressive MS. Cronic Pain, shaking, cronic pins and needles, weakness in limbs plus losing mobility. Had to give up his teaching job 4 months ago after gradually reducing hours.

Not to mention the judgement when we use a blue badge because we look ok in that moment. And apparently labour are going to find us both work. Yippee cant wait to meet the employer who is going to take us both on. I am sure pissing my chair on a reg basis won’t matter to them or the losing counciouness at least a couple of times a day.

i am just fed up of yet another they are on benefits and get money and it’s not fair stamp stamp stamp. The bastards have saved up for a holiday- it’s not fair. The bastards have a mobility car but they look fine, OMG- they have got new carpets or a new sofa.

since I am guessing they none of the moaners would actually swap places with us if they could then STFU.

oh and that pip that is easy to get- my husband gets lower rate for both and that is despite providing all the evidence and appealing so we are off to tribunal. He can’t even dress himself most days and he can’t hold a pan safely or manage his medication plus many other things. If he stays on the points he is on he will lose his pip completely under these new labour proposals.

but most people know someone who’s friends, aunts, nephews, stepdaughters, cousin twice removed who lied and got it. I was taking to a lady in a wheelchair who does not get any mobility component of pip at all.

Unusual yes. Impossible no.
My husband and I (who both work) could both claim PIP, and also DLA for one of our daughters.
We only claim PIP for me, as the stress of going through that process was so much, that we took a decision not to put in anymore claims.

Op so you have epilepsy or pseudo seizures?
why are you having 20 seizures a week?
have you got the right medical care and medication?

My sister is on similar benefits and money (in fact more, because she claims DLA for two children too). She take her family abroad once a year and is able to afford new clothes, botox and filler. I do not think that she should have more of a disposable income than me and my husband. The problem is not that she claims benefits, it's that DLA is bumping it to an exceptional level. I do not agree that some people on benefits should get more than a working person. It's tax payers money and feels very unfair.

Unfortunately for every deserving person there are probably 10 that aren't

I can't believe 38% of people on here said YABU.

The world is truly going to shit.

Sorry for your situation OP.

People's attitudes can be very frustrating but you can't change them. You need to live your life as best you can and enjoy it, it doesn't matter what they think.

I would really recommend you don't read all of the comments on this thread - it probably won't make you feel good.

"Probably"?

So that's an assumption that you've made based on what? The Daily Mail? Commenters on here?

A tenfold amount of fraudulent claimers compared to genuine is a pretty fucking big claim to make so flippantly without any actual statistics to back it up.

Not on PIP. And very happy for my tax to be spent supporting you OP. People are arseholes x x

I don’t think it is impossible, and as people have written on this posts, not actually that unusual.

it is just unsustainable and those who are on the extreme end are the ones who suffer the me most.

Oh have a day off love!

Sending love and understanding x

My son had to learn everything over again and progressed more than anyone could ever have imagined but he still has a lot of physical needs and his future is very unknown such as he currently is still unable to walk and may need further surgery but even then, it's impossible to say if he'll walk again.

It's really hard. I'm so grateful that he survived and even more grateful that he's in remission but it's so hard and I wouldn't wish it on anyone.

I had to give up my job a few years ago due to my disability. My job used to bring in £1800, whereas my benefit allowance is £303.

II’m sure many roll their eyes that I get to “stay at home” and get paid for it (£303!) and live off my husband’s wage, but I doubt many would want to drop over £1500 in income as well as lose their independence and be affected daily by a health condition that can’t be cured.

People’s attitudes to benefits really suck sometimes.

Why did you edit love, Love

I think the problem is that expectations have gone up as well as diagnosis.
And also that the system isn't consistent.

My dd has a physical disability.
We've applied various times and been awarded (DLA) middle level/nothing/lower level with basically the same needs. Her condition is one that's fairly consistent for needs across the children who have it, so I'd say that they should simplify the system for people like her.
So you could have a literal tick box system. Where for certain conditions, which are provable (in her case a photo would be fine) and are not going to change, you could literally tick the box that says "x condition" knowing that meant that you get £x level.
If you have that plus another condition then you have to do the other condition separately, or you believe it effects you more.
And things like MS, it's a progressive condition, not going to improve, so it would be reasonable to have you automatically get the lowest level upon diagnosis, and then you fill out the form if you believe your needs are higher.

It would be much harder to play the system for those situations and probably save a lot of admin hence money.
It would take some of the strain out of applying for people with conditions like that too.

Obviously for things like asd it would have to still go on a case by case basis because needs vary.

But one thing I've noticed is that the expectation of what is needed/reasonable has gone up. When she was little, really until about 10 years ago, it was fairly accepted by the community that they didn't get any DLA until they were about 3/4 yo. They didn't need it. They didn't generally need more help than another child their age, so that was reasonable. We did find it irritating that it seemed to be random after that, even when we were helping each others' forms and putting similar things!
They don't generally need an EHCP. They definitely don't need mobility (doesn't effect mobility).
Over the last 10 years, gradually increasing, I've noticed that parents are indignant and fighting at being turned down for DLA for a child who is young enough that it really is the correct decision; they want an EHCP set up (and often a 1-2-1 which really if anything will limit their dc's ability) before they arrive at school and why don't they get mobility, it isn't fair!
There seems to be this expectation that society owes them because their child is disabled, and I have heard that expressed by a couple of parents in various ways.

I'm sure that the couple receiving £2,500 in benefits would prefer to be fit and well enough to work and earn their money.

Even on NMW, they'd be earning £46k between them if they both worked full time.

This. My father received DLA following a workplace accident. That and your circumstances are what the benefit system is for. In fact, I think people like you should receive more and that home care should be free if you need it and society has a responsibility to look after people like you and enable you to lead a quality
life. . But the explosion in feckless workshy claimants does need to be curtailed. We are failing whole generations and the generations that will follow with the way ambition has been cut and people capable of work being better off on benefits. It’s naive to think that everyone is a genuine claimant and many households would be better off by being supported back into work, even if they don’t want to.

But I suppose, playing devils advocate, you are a family unit and so should the state provide you with funds if your family can live off your husband’s wage? I appreciate you have lost an income but objectively is it for the state to now cover some of it if your husband can? I know I am being quite provocative in asking that, I’m trying to pose the philosophical question. If you don’t need it should the state provide it? People’s views on benefits do come down to different stances on the view of the state.

Three of us here with significant unrelated issues entitled to claim PIP. Two are forced to claim, one in order to work, one to survive. Third doesn't claim.

1. Me. Working, thanks to carer and PIP. Born hugely wonky, multiple physical disabilities. In a wheelchair. Have suffered shrinkflation on points awarded for exactly the same things, over time, based on me working.

(I'm one of the people who has had their 8, 6, and 4 point scores reduced
to 4, 3, and 2 points, so that despite significant visible disabilities, I'm now . only one point away from losing the PIP that allows me to work.)

1. Dd. Not working also gets UC. Severe acquired brain damage and physical damage post accident, and left wheelchair dependent. IQ and life destroyed. 24/7 care. Will never work. Some PIP points shrinkflation, but not too significant.

1. Ds Working, entitled to but doesn't claim PIP or UC etc. ASD at significant level, requiring a lot of support to hold job. May well burn out in the end.

edited for weird formatting.

Three disabled people in immediate family. Serious disability doesn't care . if someone else in the family is already disabled, when it strikes

I understand this but my point is that the parents if these children can easily expend more time and effort dealing with their child's issues than an average parent. Just because their struggles are all in one area and and aren't necessarily associated with a diagnosis then it doesn't make it any easier. It then seems odd that a child with a more even spread of struggles will be awarded state help. It doesn't really make any sense. It completely ignores the huge grey area that lots of kids and parents live in.

Btw it is also totally possible that extreme shyness can manifest as anxiety in lots of cases and start causing issues in lots of areas of daily living. DLA can be awarded for anxiety.

I’d swap!

Family of 4 surviving on 2.3k a month plus £180 child benefit. I work 40 hours a week, don’t have £5 left over by the end of the month…if any of the prices rise next year, we won’t be able to cover the bills, income will be less than outgoings, we will be fucked! Last holiday was 6 years ago, clothes are from supermarkets, don’t get free school meals.

An extra £200 a month for just two people would be great for me. I’m tired of living if I’m honest.

I advocate for my daughter, who has severe LD. Apparently she only needs £15 a week, after food and rent (she is in an assisted living flat, with 1-1 care throughout the day).

So that covers clothes, haircuts, bus fares, activities, presents.

I subsidise to the tune of £50 a week, so that she can actually have a life.

It’s a fair point about my use of “normal people” for which I apologise.

But many people who can’t claim benefits also couldn’t use public transport to get to work under any circumstances, not least because public transport just doesn’t exist at a level that meets the needs of people in work. They don’t have an income stream that allows for that. Should we also give them a benefit that keeps them in work?

And don’t try and claim now that it was simple budgeting that allowed you to do this- your first post on this literally said it was the benefits that allowed you to replace your car. And when the country is facing the benefits bill it is, can you blame people for questioning whether that is a good use of money?

Be careful what you wish for people's lives can change in seconds. The difference is when your healthy you can change your situation if you choose. Disabled people don't have this luxury.

I do not agree that some people on benefits should get more than a working person. It's tax payers money and feels very unfair.

Given that research from the Rowntree Foundation show that benefits are paid at somewhere between destitution and poverty levels depending on your status, perhaps we should be campaigning for better salaries across the board. That would lift working people above benefits level and reduce the amount of top up benefits paid out without impoverishing vulnerable people.

Every time anyone fights for a better salary though there’s an outcry about greedy people striking and inconveniencing the general public. Much easier to lower benefits than suggest employers should pay wages at a level that don’t need to be subsidised by the public purse.

That’s the thing though, the people who deride people like yourselves have no clue. They’re spiteful from a position of privilege. They are no better than the billionaires of the world who look down on everyone else as the ‘little people’. Best to ignore, they are ignorant not clever.