To think benefits need to be cut to fund increased spending on defence

[Viviennemary]

This is absolutely necessary. Keir Starmer shouldnt have backed down the last time. But now with the current situation with Russia drastic steps need to be taken. We simply can't afford to sustain the current benefits bill with the armed forces so depleted. The money is needed to increase defence.

Medical/ social care evidence only for pip and dla which are pre requ for CA. I wrote that i believe CA should be increased for those who can show they do the full hours req for CA to be awarded. CA rate for those who do care is paultry. There are people who claim that dont do the req hours. Dla/pip shouldnt accept evidence such as letters from family and friends or diaries. Evidemce should be professional based.

France and the uk lean heavily on each other as regards defence.

Do you not know that those descriptors are suitable for all disabilities and adversley impact some claims that aren't physical in nature? Not sure what you're getting down to.

The strongest claims are professional based. It would be highly unlikely to get PIP with zero professional back up and just a carers diary.

The old Autism bashing.

“Do you not know that those descriptors are suitable for all disabilities and adversley impact some claims that aren't physical in nature?”-such as?

They wouldn't be very interested in evidence that only included a diary or a letter from family/friends anyway.

I didn’t say it was purely as a catch all. I said it was partly as a safety net - a catch all, designed to ensure that those who have clearly demonstrable needs will receive some support. DLA was based on this concept too. Below is from the Act which introduced PIP as a replacement for DLA:

The standard rate of PIP acts as a secondary safety net as well as a distinct tier of entitlement. It is intentionally designed to support claimants whose conditions have a substantial impact on their ability to complete everyday tasks, even if they do not reach the threshold for severe impairment. The standard rate also functionally acts as a safety net by providing financial support and automatic access to other benefits and concessions such as the disabled persons railcard and the blue badge scheme, to those who do not meet the strict 12-point threshold for severe limitation, while recognising that they still need help.

Such as autism which is why i said the system needs to cgange so that it better reflects conditions like autism rather than being physical based.

"“The system does need to be changed regardless of any benefit reform as it doesn't adequately provide descriptors for those with conditions such as autism”

That isn't autism bashing thats saying it needs to be more inclusive. Are you that eager to misrepresent what i write?

Evidence like that shouldnt be comsidered at all not even with other documentation.

PIP already assesses for autism. I agree that it could be done better though. But your assertion that PIP is physical based (and l’m directly quoting you) is incorrect. PIP assesses for a broad range of mental health conditions and has a very high bar for awards based on mental health alone.

My autistic daughter has full PIP- enhanced for both daily living and mobility. It was very easy to prove her support needs. We have masses of professional evidence. Why wouldn’t we?

It is though. It is helpful when you have fluctuating conditions. Not everyone is off to the GP every time they have a flare/symptom.

How do carers who have given up work because they need to attend to their loved one show the impact and level of care without them keeping a record of their hours? Are you suggesting we spend £££ more than the award itself to have professionals go in and shadow families?

Yep, this. I think the assessment for autism could be better - there are difficulties where there is no formal diagnosis, despite the law saying there doesn’t need to be one, but in general, as with other conditions, if you have the evidence to support the claim it can be very straightforward.

Starbucks and Amazon pay their fair share of taxes?

EVERYONE comes to England and not work and has loads of kids?

They have done a great job on you. They have you defending the billionaire class and vilifying those worse off than you. Wow. Just wow.

I think a diary can be helpful in some situations with other evidence included.

How about the part of the DLA form that can be filled in by teachers? Should that not be allowed either?

Ok, i accept that but stand by the fact that it isnt purely a safety net and as stated in your quote is a distinct tier of entitlement.

The fact that someone doesnt reach the severe limitation threshold acknoweldges that some people do. Severe limitation as in can be more severe than others.

This doesnt change my mind tho, if it came dowm to it i would rather those who cant prove that they have severe limitation lose out than those who can prove it. I do believe that those with the most severe disabilities should continue to be supported, ive repeated this many times.

True but the comment was at least an effort to get the thread back on track..

In other news a Russian warship fired warning shots at a civilian vessel in the English Channel earlier today.....

Yes with clear misunderstanding in how the system works. I fail to see why somebody who qualifies across both the standard rates and receives more points than somebody on just 1 enhanced should lose their PIP.

Exactly. And all for a piss poor £3 an hour that saves the tax payer a fortune in social care costs. Carers allowance can’t be claimed unless the person you’re caring for has been awarded the daily living component of a qualifying disability benefit. This indicates quite a high level of dependence, so is used to evidence that the 35 hours would likely be needed. It includes supervisionary care during the night too. As an outreach worker l regularly saw parents of disabled children - both kids and adult children, who were on their knees trying to hold down jobs as well as spending every hour outside of work caring. And yet again the default is that they must be cheating. There are some posters here who very clearly have no clue what disability is, or what caring for someone with a disability entails. It’s pathetic.

Yes it does and that is what ive said, it needs to better reflect those conditions to assess for conditions like autism. Yes it takes it into account especially in the mobility questions but the care descriptors are rubbish for these conditions, they are aimed at physical actions in the main. Yes someone can make a light meal but do they require visuals, prompts, can they eat that food.

I didn’t find it difficult. My autistic dd scores high on the food areas and we have loads of professional evidence to back it up.

The care descriptors apply just as much to mental health conditions as to physical ones. Mental health issues can be and are responsible for difficulties in carrying out physical activities. It’s a matter of explaining how your mental health affects your ability to care for yourself and undertake the daily tasks assessed.

The ability to cook and serve a meal from scratch is a stand alone descriptor. The amount of help and prompting in all forms is taken into consideration but it doesn’t assess for whether the claimant can eat the food because that’s assessed separately. This happens with a lot of the descriptors to avoid awarding points twice for what is essentially the same activity.

Agree, as with other conditions, a lot depends on the quality of the evidence presented in support of the claim. I’d also add that cooking a meal and being able to eat it are two different activities, both assessed, but separately. Many of the descriptors are similarly specific to avoid awarding points for what would essentially be the same activity. It’s a non issue.

Great, where did i say you wouldn't? Oh and i see you didnt admit or apologise for saying i was autism bashing even though i was saying the opposite.