What do people actually expect DLA to be spent on??

[Whoknowshey]

This comes off a thread I read recently where a poster was being criticised for spending DLA on a fridge .

Im curious as to what people think DLA / PIP should be spent on ? Due to various circumstances I am aware of what people spend it on and I also have a child in receipt PIP so I know how theirs gets spent . Some differs to how my child’s is spent. Some I agree with , some I don’t but the fact is it’s for the individuals needs and that varies massively. Especially with non physical disabilities it would be hard to spend it on things directly related to their needs but there are many ways in which it affects their lives that it can help with .

Some I have came across;

• theme park passes- the child cannot do what others can , going out with friends etc . The passes give the opportunity to enjoy childhood safely.
• Toys/ things for hyperfocuses - a hyper focus is a form of regulation . To some it may look like an obsession with a character but it’s actually a way for the individual to regulate.
• Towards the family income because parents cannot work.
• Furniture - lots can get destroyed due to the individuals issues.
• Save it towards the child’s future . The child may not ever be able to get a job and adult social care is appalling .

I think all those things are justified . But I have seen comments against that.

My child has PIP as a young adult. They have a part of the money as theirs to do with what they wish ( which can be wasted hence why they do not have it all and I am their appointee - but also they have no way of having extra money as cannot work nor claim any benefits , have to stay in education to hold on to that EHCP and to help with their life skills etc ) A part goes into the house because I care for them financially as though they are a child - yet usually parents do not have to do this with an adult child. They know exactly what they are paying for with this - rent, shopping etc, social groups. It doesn’t really touch what I spend on them as the majority actually goes on a mobility car , because they have to be taken to most places . This way they are paying bills etc as they see it - an itemised of what they pay - because I know if they go in to supported living it will be eaten up by that and I don’t want them to get used to just having all that money, I think the way I do it is justified as it is for their needs ( food aversions so more expensive shop , get through clothes very quickly due to sensory issues , hyper focuses , social groups specific to their needs ) .

A bit fed up of seeing people attacked because someone doesn’t deem what they spend as “ for their needs “ yet those needs are so vast .

Interested on thoughts.

Get off the theme park roundabout for fucks’s sake. Why are you so bloody mean spirited that you would deny a disabled child the same opportunity to take part in this kind of thing than children without the disability. This is EXACTLY what DLA was designed for. It’s been explained again and again what these benefits are designed for and still you bang on with your mealy mouthed posts. What do you spend your child benefit on ? No-one is looking over your shoulder telling you how to spend that are they ?

Part of the cost is that earnings are reduced. Carers often have to put their careers on hold, reduce hours, find an understanding employer that allows them to take time off at short notice or even give up their job completely.

These are the hidden costs of having a disabled child. And before someone says but carers, that is an insultingly low amount that works out pennies per hour if you have a child that needs some sort of care 24hrs a day. (We need to be alert to night time wandering, even on nights when it doesn't happen, you still sleep light and wake at any slight noise, I haven't had a full night's sleep in almost 16 years).

DLA and PIP have absolutely no restrictions on how they are spent. The clue for the clueless, is in the names of the benefits. They are designed to enable disabled people to take part in society by removing the cost barriers they face. This has been explained over and over again. What is it that you don’t understand ?

Nope. Wrong in every way. The government is consulting with disabled people in a review of the way the benefits are assessed and awarded. The main focus is that of making assessment procedures fairer and more transparent so that taxpayers money isn’t wasted on expensive appeals, which is currently the only way some claimants can get a fair award. 70% of claimants who go to appeal are successful which indicates very strongly that the current system isn’t fit for purpose.

The option of vouchers has been dismissed because it’s accepted that cash benefits allow disabled people more autonomy over how to spend the money to best support their needs. Reform and the Tories have accepted this as well as the current government. And the plans to increase the points needed in one category of daily living activities has also been scrapped because all parties agree there are better ways to reform the benefits for cost savings with as little impact on claimants as possible. Please don’t post if you have no idea what you’re talking about. Disabled people have enough to put up with without people spreading shit that has no basis in fact.

There,s two groups of guys in our local weatherspoons attending every morning for their pints of beer, all on p.i.p ….

Carers allowance is £83.30 a week for a minimum of 35 hours a week caring. That’s less than £3 an hour and the maximum earnings limit is less than £200 a week. As a nation we really should be thoroughly ashamed of this. Unpaid family and friends acting as carers make huge sacrifices and save the tax payer a fortune, and this is how we repay them.

Well, presumably fewer people would be eligible for vouchers under the new system.

It would strengthen public confidence that their tax money is being used to benefit those who need it most. Vouchers would also prevent parents taking the proverbial and using their child’s DLA for spa days.

And you know this how ? Whether they are in Wetherspoons every morning or not is irrelevant as long as their disabilities qualify for PIP. Or are you of the opinion that disabled people shouldn’t be allowed in Wetherspoons ? PIP is designed to cover the cost of disability. It’s seldom the only income the disabled person has so explain to me how it’s any business of yours how disabled people spend their money ?

So, we are very new to DLA.

our one year old son was awarded high rate a few months ago.

before that, we received zero in benefits, had four children, a mortgage and were both working.

I had to give up my job to care for my youngest 24/7 - the DLA he gets literally goes straight into our house funds, helping towards mortgage and bills.

We do spend money on expensive sensory toys as he is completely blind, and there are other costs such as a £300 sun hood and rain cover to go with his specialist buggy (he will never be able to sit unaided)

he is tube fed and will soon have surgery for a leg in his tummy, the adapted vests are £20 for three in M&S

Im so grateful for the DLA just about keeping us afloat, but we are worse off.

I think as long as the money benefits the recipient in whatever way, be it for days out etc or to help with the home they are living in, then it’s fine,

Using it for spa days mmmmm......

Course they are!

Are you going to suggest that child benefit comes in vouchers too, that can only be spent on school uniform or shoes or books, or is it just disabled people & their families that you hold in disdain?

Then they don’t desperately need the extra cash as much as they say they do do they?

Posters: It’s so expensive to be disabled and the money is to help with this:
Another poster: I put mine into my son’s ISA!
Original poster: …well it’s not the taxpayers business how their money is spent

I would have no issue with child benefit being paid in vouchers.

My DD receives DLA and I take her to the farm around twice a month. Animals are soothing to her and she’s always so gentle and calm when we’re there, which gives her a break from feeling overwhelmed by the noise and everything else away from the farm.
Yes we receive a discount because of her disability, and if it brings her joy in a world full of challenges and obstacles that other people are ignorant to then that’s all I’m bothered about. Tax payers’ feelings about it don’t matter.

I think taxpayers will beg to differ when Reform get in 😬

Wow what an attack! You tell me to stop going on about theme parks and yet your post is about it.

Firstly I completely disagree with you that theme park visits is exactly what DLA has been designed for. That is utterly ludicrous. Going to a theme park isn't an extra cost associated with living with a disability. No mental gymnastics can really justify this.

Secondly I'm not denying a disabled child the opportunity of going to a theme park at all. I just don't think the taxpayer should be funding this. Their visit can be funded by their parents like every other child and they will probably be eligible for a carer's ticket so won't have to pay for an accompanying adult like most families have to.

I think having a disability is generally harder and more expensive. I have a friend who has a disability and she struggles to get shoes that fit / are comfortable and so they are often more expensive. She needs an adapted car and the adaptations are non standard so she doesn’t have a notability car. She also works full time and lives alone. I imaging her pip goes towards these added expenses. However how she addresses her budget in practicality I don’t know. It’s nobody else’s business. Having a disability is just more expensive which is what pip represents an attempt to ease some of that burden / even the playing field a little.

Agree. If anything it’s cheaper for disabled children as there are often discounts for them and for carers, queue jumps etc

Nope. Why would fewer people be eligible . Elgibility goes on need, and that need is translated into likely cost. That cost exists however the benefits are paid unless you’re proposing that certain elements of disability are not longer supported.

A voucher system is OK as long as parents are prepared for their child benefit to be paid and limited in the same way, otherwise to assume disabled people aren't’ capable of spending their money wisely is discrimination.

As has been explained ad nauseam until I’m sick of it. There are no plans to pay these benefits in vouchers because it’s accepted that disability affects different people in different ways, so cash is the best option to allow them autonomy in spending the benefit money in whatever way best supports them. I really do find it incomprehensible how people with no experience of disability think themselves qualified to tell disabled people how to spend their benefit money, and even more incomprehensible that they think disabled people aren’t tax payers.

There are many threads on MN advising posters to check their racism. I’d say just as many posters should check their ableism. Because this whole thread reeks of it.

I have never ever claimed that there are restrictions on how PIP or DLA is spent. You have completely imagined that. I have suggested there should be some restrictions or at least an assessment of the costs associated with a disability should form part of the awards process but that isn't the same as saying this is current policy.

I don’t think there is a single poster on here who begrudges you receiving DLA for a blind and severely disabled child.

The queue jumps are only available for certain disabilities for which queuing causes problems.

The reality is that if a parent without a disabled child wants to be able to do all these things and therefore wants more money than UC they can:

• work while the child is in funded childcare
• work while the child is at school
• work more than funded childcare by finding a job that allows them to earn enough to pay for extra hours childcare and still take home pay for those extra hours, or
• work longer hours by leaving their child to go to and from school alone and be in the house alone when they reach high school

If your child has a disability it's not unlikely that you will find

• no childminder or nursery equipped to meet their needs
• any childminder who is equipped to meet their needs can only take them so has to charge 4 or 5 times more than normal
• either they cannot attend school due to illness or there being no suitable provision for their needs, or they can attend school, but their ability to attend is so patchy that at least one parent cannot hold down a regular job.
• even if they are able to have full school days most days, childminders and out of school clubs may be unable to meet their needs meaning that one parent can work a maximum of the hours the child is at school minus travel time
• at least one parent may have to get a term-time only job because there is no feasible care outside the child's parents once their special school closes for holidays
• they are unable to manage travel or being alone in the house at a normal age, so instead of both parents or a single parent being able to get a 9-5 job without childcare costs by the time the child is 11 or 12, for the parent of the disabled child this is more like 15,16,18 or never!

The parent with a non-disabled child can choose many paths which will lead them to expensive holidays if they want, those paths are likely closed to the disabled child's parent.

It might be cheaper but they may not be able to take part in everything or stay as long as their non disabled peers

My Son was awarded DLA 5 years ago. I honestly would never judge what another family spends it on. 5 years ago, I had given up work to care for him, so it went into the family pot and was needed to buy basics. After going back to work 2 years ago his DLA has been used to fund things like his paticular tastes in food, it's replaced furniture that he has broken. Its also gone towards a dream trip of his for next year. Its about balance and whatever is needed at the time.

You do realise that the cost of administering vouchers is MORE expensive than the current system?

That's without the nonsense of vouchers being able to determine a disabled persons' individual needs?

Or do you think that vouchers should only be redeemable against physical aids?

Have you ignored all of the stories upthread about parents having to give up careers to step in for our disabled children? Governments should be doing more to assist families not less.

The paltry savings that will be made from this will kick more people into poverty and who will provide the care for disabled people when their carers are forced back to work?