To think there is a definite surge in annoyance towards the disabled?

[WarySwan]

I have seen it in real life. Not just social media forums and news outlets where every other post seems to be about 'free money this for disabled' and 'free cars'.

My 2 children have autism. They get highest rate DLA. About £800 a month. We get respite care funded that costs the tax payer about £700 a month.

Just had an extension on our new build house, housing association, brand new bedroom and ensuite installed. Free of charge through the council.

Motability 7 seater car. 25 plate.

People seem to just see this and see the money. They do not see the costs that are present because of disability. The amount of time and resources it takes to keep 2 profoundly children at home.

They do not see that my children will need 24/7 care for life. 2-1 support in public. The constant cleaning and caring. Waking up at the crack of dawn, years on end. Cleaning smearing and endless washing. Endless marks on your body from a child who doesn't get that taking a chunk out of you will hurt that much and scar

Watching your eldest almost die as he can't speak a word or use a communication device. Meaning appendicitis went undetected until he was almost dying. The constant battle of keeping a cannula in his arm with hospital staff just not getting why a play therapist does not bloody cut it and he needs constant supervision that I cannot possibly do 24/7 without moving from the bedside. The weeks spend in recovery because of this.

If we do not or cannot provide this care, residential placements are about £40,000+ per month. Yes. Per month. It is eye watering in cost. That won't change anytime soon because social care is beyond shot to bits.

My children deserve the best life possible. And a dignified society should surely want to ensure this happens? Children who are not disabled and their parents have options. They have chances and doorways. Mine will never work. Never have a marriage or children, they won't even be able to cook a basic meal.

There is no overtime or upskilling for me. No situation where they fly the nest and I can focus on my career again. Unless they become some dangerous through no fault of their own that a 40k plus a month placement goes ahead as the alternative means I could die or be seriously injured, and that would mean they'd be at risk if I am literally unconscious on the floor.

They still deserve dignity and compassion. The chance of a good life. They are very happy currently. Good routines that are followed to a T. Safe at home because I have the resources to do it.

Care placement does not save money. Unfortunately. It would cost over ten times what I get in benefits.

I have seen so many mentions of people saying those on benefits should have no savings at all. Nothing. Really? You think my life isn't hard enough? You think I shouldn't be allowed a small nest of savings too?

When I finally drop down from caring, I will have next to no pension. After spending a lifetime ensuring the state doesn't have to take full responsibility for 2 adult men that will mean at least 4 paid members of staff are present at all times.

I am not just talking about MN. It is everywhere. Even 'funny' reels on Instagram targeted about how the disabled get this and that. How they should all drive a basic tiny car that has something written in bold to make sure everyone knows its a free car, as if they're really disabled, they'll use. That'll stop the chancers eh!

This is NOT about criticism towards PIP and DLA for things people deem questionable... even though they almost certainly dont have all the facts. This is about the blatant and not hidden disgust and begrudge of help to those with lifelong and profound disability

PEOPLE keep saying in black and white, no room for confusion in their words, that the disabled get too much. That it isn't fair.

I suppose this thread will get deleted. But a lot of views seem to be going unchallenged about the disabled that wouldn't be allowed if it was about something else that's suppose to be a protected characteristic. Seems to have quite a few comparisons with a certain country in Europe 80 or so years ago. When the hatred and deceit was being thrown around and brain washing people before not many years later, the public became okay with euthanasia of them.

Hell, I am sure we are already there for some. As I have seen with my own eyes, people commenting on MN and the likes of social media where their bloody name and pictures of themselves and their work can be traced, that euthanasia could be an option, ideally.

It's not psychologists who assess for PIP.
And the assessors routinely lie on their reports to deprive disabled people of money. I witnessed this and it was shocking what they do and how blatant their lies are.

Awaiting the deluge of "don't compare us to Nazi Germany! That's a weak comparison! That's offensive!", even though you're absolutely spot on.

The reason they hate the comparison so much is because it's accurate and the truth makes them deeply uncomfortable.

YANBU OP. My dd has autism, but she is HF and will hopefully at some point be able to hold down a job. She's not entitled to PIP (denied twice 🙄), so it's crucial she can secure a job for her future.

I began watching the Man in the HIgh Castle yesterday, and during episode 2, there's a scene with a cop. He's a war veteran and fought against the Nazis in the war. They're in the south, so it's warm, but it looks like it's snowing. Joe asks him what it is, and the cop replies, "Oh, that's the local hospital incinerator, they're doing their daily burn of the elderly, the crippled and the brain dead". He said it so matter-of-factly. This man fought the Nazis and now considers this just a part of daily life.

It struck me that as a society, we're sleepwalking into this sort of mentality. So many people died, so we could live in a society where people are treated equally and humanely. Yet it's like we've just forgotten how easy it is to scapegoat and dehumanise those who aren't exactly like us.

We're on a downward spiral as a species.

Yes. And I vote Labour.

Mental health, is a very broad spectrum, you dont just get PIP for having a diagnosis/ Diagnosis,it goes off now they impact you
Some people with severe and enduring mental illness, will never be able to work ,as they unable to function at all.

Exactly the point I was clumsily making in my previous post.

So, what disabilities should people be allowed to claim for?

We can't throw around this half baked "yes, too many disabilities these days" without a firm idea of what disabilities are deserving. So let's see a list.

The word 'anxiety' is sometimes used by those with more serious conditions like schizophrenia because of the stigma. Even some doctors have encouraged people not to disclose certain things. A person may have incontinence or misophonia (leading them to explode with anger). This is their personal and private health information which they're not obligated to share with anyone and doctors can't break confidentiality, so laypeople on here and elsewhere cannot speculate with any certainty on other people's limitations re school and work or difficulties they face in everyday situations.

I was abused by my family and it has left me with crippling difficulties which I won't disclose even on an anonymous online forum. No one would ever be able to work out what these difficulties are. I was left on the dole for years but when I tried to apply for ESA and PIP I got no points and couldn't face going through the system any more. I also have asthma, bronchiectasis and have issues from colon cancer surgery but it counted for nothing.

So my point is, none of us know the medical history and the attendant consequences of others; children and adults.

Disabled people are a minority group that is easy to pick on since our disabilities are diverse and this can be seen in the way that some disabilities are not considered to be genuine. Everyone who is not disabled thinks it will never happen to them, until it does. Anyone who is in any way in a minority knows their turn will come to be marginalised further. Once you encourage victimisation of any minority group, others will follow.

Yes, I knew when I posted it someone would bring up abortion. Which of course is considered differently due to the debate about when life starts to 'count', which I'm not getting into.
I take your point about war and capital punishment and agree that lines are drawn in different places in different societies.
I suppose a better phrasing would be a hard principle of preserving human life. Which may at times involve the loss of some lives if deemed necessary to protect other lives.
Which would cover arguments for killing in war, and shooting by the police, but no longer capital punishment, which obviously we have dispensed with in the UK. And certainly not killing or allowing the death of innocent people considered unproductive or burdensome.

I work from home. I’m physically disabled. And I have audhd.

I need help to shower. I need prompting to eat. I struggle to prep food (physically and mentally).

but I work full time.

I have a Motability car as I need an automatic with heated seats and a steering wheel ball and it needs to be higher so I can get in and out. Also I need to have a boot big enough for my wheelchair.

why would you think I can’t work?

#2 is late 40s, and was a thalidomide baby

Thalidomide was removed from the market by the manufacturer in 1961, how did his mother get it nearly twenty years later and why did she take it when the effects were well known?

That's sadly what I see coming too. It's why I have serious concerns about the calls to restore the death penalty in the UK. Once we legitimise the government killing citizens it's a very dangerous and slippery slope, worse still if it's shaped by public opinion based on how things seem at the moment. Same with assisted dying. I fully get its place for people who are terminally ill and suffering but there needs to be serious protection against coercion or inappropriate expansion of this process.

But you must recognise that those lines are not fixed and even across a relatively cohesive society peole will have different views on where they should be. You may consider the abortion situation different but millions would idsagree with you and who is to say which side is 'right' in that debate.

It's interesting that you have phrased it as 'I suppose a better phrasing would be a hard principle of preserving human life. Which may at times involve the loss of some lives if deemed necessary to protect other lives.' People die in war for all number of reasons other than to protect life, in fact most wars are about protecting principles rather than people's lives. Ukraine aren't fighting Russia because of a belief that Russia intend to kill every last ukrainian, they are fighting for their sovereignty and geographical integrity. Much as it would be prefereable for many if there was a universal principle of preserving human life, I think we are not actually living in that world.

If genetic testing had been available to you and IVF to pick out embryos not affected, would you welcome that? As we progress as a society and have medical advances surely the focus should be on that?
It is interesting how you say you think a lot of people in your family are on the spectrum. There are theories about which claim that society valuing smart people in the last 100 years and them mating more, has led to an explosion of autism and in some cases, more severe cases like in your children. I think the answer is more research and help for parents.
There is no point getting emotional about all of this. Ageing demographic means more and more care costs and more and more burden on workers. I do not think anything is aimed at children directly with disabilities or anyone with disabilities. It is just people exhausted with life in general.

It's easy to say there's no point getting emotional about it when it isn't your child some people are talking about on threads like this as if they don't deserve to live.

IVF is a very invasive, expensive and time consuming process that is emotionally devastating.

But I think a lot of people here are forgetting how much care is provided by siblings, especially in later life when parents have died.

The diagnostic criteria have not widened, you can compare ICD-10 and ICD-11 - there were Atypical autism and Asperger before, these are now included under Autism code but the set of criteria is the same. Asperger can lead to disability as there is social and communication impairment that can severely affect everyday life, including employment.

I agree with you. Some people, like your unfortunate children, obviously do have real disabilities and deserve as much support as possible.

However, and I know this will probably upset some people, I’m very sceptical about the current popularity of the term 'masking'. For instance, a child has awful behaviour problems at home, their school reports that they behave perfectly there, and the parent says "that's just because they’re masking and let it all out when they get home, so that proves there’s a problem".

Don’t we all "mask" to a certain extent, suppressing or changing our behaviour to suit the circumstances?

It is generally accepted that many notable, successful people from the past (e.g. Einstein, Isaac Newton, Michelangelo, Thomas Jefferson), who were just regarded as eccentric or socially awkward, would today probably be diagnosed as having Asperger's, or being "on the spectrum". Would it have helped them to have a label?

I'm autistic - minimal support needs most days, although the off-days are getting more frequent as I get older...

Anyway, I say this because it's run in my family going back many generations (we have documentary evidence of "the family problem"), and my great aunt presented almost exactly the same as me, except this was the 1920s. She had a meltdown in public as a teenager, and was institutionalised. Now, she was a bright girl as a teenager, loved art and music, and was outwardly typical (the family tradition was for the mothers to teach their children how to mask).

She was drugged, given ECT and we suspect lobotomised at one point. She spent the next 70 years stood at a window, either silent or screaming. She hadn't spoken a word since the 1950s.

People like to believe that we - as a society - were more enlightened than that in the latter half of the 20th century, but we definitely weren't. As long as those who made people uncomfortable were out of sight, the problem didn't exist.

This is the future we're heading back to, because the only way for the government to give the people what they want - less money spent on the less-fortunate - is to either gather them all together for bulk care (institutions) or abandon them altogether.

And it terrifies me, because I have nephews who both present exactly the same way.

You may not consider yourself disabled but others would.
I have a disability and had an argument with a disability employment adviser donkeys years ago saying I was not disabled.
As I got a lot older I realised that how I saw myself was not the only piece of the jigsaw. Employers saw me as disabled. Colleagues saw me as disabled ( if they knew). I kept it a secret at my last employer. HR knew but colleagues. I was promoted and all fine. The moment I shared it with them my life changed. Their attitude changed towards me. So do bear in mind other people see you differently to how you see yourself.

Basically for the last few years Politics has meant 'blaming' various groups be they migrants/people of colour/gay/muslim/whatever

Why?

As the slogan goes the problem isnt the 'Have Nots' its the 'Have Yachts' and their attempts to milk even more money from us

I did agree with you that the lines are not fixed, acknowledging your point, which is why I changed it on reflection to principle. It's also fair to say that other societies adhere to different principles. However, we are discussing an issue in UK society.
I'm not claiming to agree with how the principle of preservation of human life is always executed. Of course there are situations of state sanctioned killing that I personally disagree with. My point was that when they occur, they will be rooted in the principle of necessity to preserve other lives. Even if as individuals we disagree with that 'necessity'.
There is no argument that failing to preserve the lives of severely disabled people is necessary to save other lives, so would fall outside of that principle.

Yes, this is where European society is going now, it's pretty much obvious already.