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.

To call people low functioning.

I did not post that, please address this misunderstanding immediately.

Yes all those school kids with air pollution caused asthma and their need to carry inhalers paid for by the NHS in their school bags.

The rate of disabilities cannot be used as a proxy for people “taking from the pot”

The hatred is driven by the government making everyone out to be frauds and liars who people think are raking it in in benefits.

Yes, I do.

I don't like them and I don 't buy them but I do think they are better.

They have picked a 'side' politically but they are not perniciously lying and trying to stoke tensions or stir up civil unrest.

I find that hard to believe, they di of course exist
But they cost eye watering amounts and they are a very last resort when all else has failed
LA,s are not going ti fund them unless. It,s absolutely necessary and everyone is un agreement that's in the best interests of the child.

Sorry, I confused you with Lego bricks whoever.
Hazard of being AuDHD is not being able to keep track of who said what when new people chime in on what I thought was a back and forth side conversation,

Apologies.

Me too. I think there is a very real danger of this.

Emotional thinking is just as important as 'rational' thinking. Calling people racial slurs does not physically harm them, or change anything really except it is really and profoundly wrong.

If you're really not invested or advocating anything why are you repeatedly asking questions which suggest such morally repugnant things? What is your stake in this? Are you on every message board about sexual assault asking why we spend money investigating crimes like that? Do you pose the question about whether or not it's worth it to provide any kind of care to the over 60s at all? Do you repeatedly question what the point of cancer care is? Or why bother with food banks?

People are certainly allowed their own views, and it's fine (even if I completely disagree) for people to say they don't believe disabled people should get the level of state care they do. But you are being completely disingenuous if you think it's acceptable to float eugenics or murdering disabled people and pretend you are only asking a question.

Being civilised, being kind, having human rights upheld simply by virtue of being a legal human being (and not a foetus which - rightly or wrongly - does not yet have human rights), these are all completely valid arguments. Why do you get to claim that we all have to prove our (perfectly normal) moral standpoints without resorting to arguments that you deem invalid? Rational arguments are not inherently worth more than emotional ones. Who made you the decider of that?

I wish we had a government who would heavily come down on the biases of all media agencies.

Unfortunately we live in an age where the likes of Trump and Johnson actively paid for Russian bot factories to run interference in the run up to elections and this is seen as OK.

The people should not be treated like pawns and don't deserve to have their fears played with via social media.

We deserve the truth and a government who puts our needs before those of their rich political backers.

It's interesting that the Labour government is primarily responsible for driving through the Assisted Dying Act while at the same time, creating an unsustainable welfare package. Perhaps their efforts are not as generous as may first appear...

<<Pretty much everyone now knows people who are exaggerating or fabricating issues in order to get everything increasingly generous benefits >>

What actual evidence do you have for this statement except for your own preconceived ideas and personal anecdotal experience?

Government data on this https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/fraud-and-error-in-the-benefit-system-financial-year-2024-to-2025-estimates/fraud-and-error-in-the-benefit-system-financial-year-ending-fye-2025

Suggest that whilst the level of overpayment of benefits payments did go up, during Covid, it is on its way down over the last year and that overpayments (some of which are errors on the part of the Govt not fraud and some are genuine errors not deliberate fraud) is in the region of 3% so hardly a massive number !. Before Covid, they were in the region of 2% of all payments

Whilst we can have a meaningful conversation aboiut the level of benefits and who should be paid them and the increasing number of older retired people (who btw make up far the largest proportion of welfare claimants - including the state pension) and can we afford this, there is absolutely mo evidence at all that people are making more fraudulent claims. None at all. Regardless of what 'you and your friends know or have seen in people you know'

Why do you find it hard to believe? You do know residential special schools exist? Yes they cost a fortune (starting around about £120,000 pa and going rapidly upwards). You are right, children are not placed in them readily but some children are. Two children I know of are in a locked down school because they elope, one in a residential school 52 week placement because their young sibling was at serious risk of harm, one because their mother was at risk of harm, and one because school failure (weekdays only).

Of course, you're just asking questions. 🙄

I personally think we shouldn't leave disabled people to starve because it's morally abhorrent, horrifically cruel, because every human being has intrinsic value and worth, and because if we become the kind of society that disposes of people because they are not economically useful to us, then that irrevocably diminishes us. But as you have said that you only want arguments that do not involve morality, I'll also give you the argument I made before. Then I think I'm going to have to hide this thread, it's making me lose whatever faith in humanity I still had.

With AI and automation exploding, most of the jobs we all do will very likely become obsolete in the near future. There won’t be anywhere near enough work left for the number of humans alive. The obscenely wealthy have no need to or particular interest in keeping the rest of us housed/fed/alive once we’re no longer needed for their profits.
Their only restraint would be the calculation that mass starvation or outright culling of the “non-productive” might provoke revolt among those still deemed useful. Once enough people like you declare that you are perfectly comfortable with the elimination of anyone who fails an economic utility test, you remove that final inhibition. You have just given them explicit public permission to apply the same criterion to whoever they choose, whenever it becomes convenient.
Once the principle is established that human life possesses worth only insofar as it generates profit, that individuals have no intrinsic dignity and are just disposable economic units, you would have to be delusional to imagine that standard will permanently exempt you. Even before that, you, or someone you care about, can become disabled tomorrow. A single illness or accident is all it takes.
So, if nothing else, naked self-interest should make you oppose that idea.

Thank you so much for articulating this.

Are you blaming Russian bot factories now for the BBC manipulating and misrepresenting Trump’s speech?

OP, I have the utmost compassion for you and your family. I cannot begin to imagine how difficult your life is and the day to day grind you live with. I do not begrudge you a penny.

I begrudge the hell out of the people who take advantage of the welfare benefits that you are totally entitled to and allow the likes of the people you mention to tar everyone in receipt of disability benefits with the same brush. There needs to be much greater efforts to crack down on the grifters taking advantage of the welfare state before it buckles entirely and families like yours are left without a lifeline.

I can’t think of any left-wing media soundbites going around at the moment that are harmful to social cohesion.

How much money have they devoted to finding fraud? If you don’t look you don’t find but it costs money to look.

“Trans women are women”

And calling pretty much anyone who disagrees about left wing policies “far right”

What a horrible thing to say about a child that can’t help being disabled. That’s a terrible attitude. If anything sever ever happens to you health wise & you need hospital treatment/care maybe you will decline it if you don’t think its worth the cost to society!

Certainly in the West our ideas about the intrinsic value of human life come from Christianity. Which is why it has historically opposed abortion, infanticide, suicide, euthanasia, and so on. That view is based on the way Christianity sees humans as being, at their core, part of the divine life. Or God being in all humans might be a simpler way to put it.

There are other belief systems that have that set of values, but - and this is something many people in our culture don't really understand - many cultures have not believed these things. And therefore have supported things like suicide, euthanasia, infanticide, and all the rest. These have been quite common human behaviours, supported by the societies they occur in, and in many cases institutionalised.

People are very naive if they think it is impossible we could return to those ways of thinking.

Most of those come down to the idea that some human lives are not worth living, or require too many resources from the community, or only count as "people" after the community or parent takes responsibility for them.

We have undoubtedly seen significant challenges to some of the Christian ideas about the intrinsic value of all human lives within the 20th century, legally and socially. We took a step back from those after WWII< but I think the memory of that has faded significantly. There are countries in the west now where infanticide of disabled infants is allowed, and I will be surprised if that doesn't happen in my own country within the next 15 years or so.

We are in a period of social flux on these questions where many people have the residual feeling that we should value all human lives, while simultaneously wanting to put limits on what counts as a worthwhile human life, or one that counts. Where this will go is difficult to predict, social change is often not linear, though I am fairly pessimistic myself. The value of human life needs to be rooted in a deep belief system, and I'm not sure what that is for most people now.

To put this more simply, it seems people would like to pick and choose their morals, depending on what suits them best at the time.

I already said I know they exist i just find it hard to belive you know several children placed in them as they are so scarce