To think that this survey is at odds with what the government is telling us ?

[ThreadGuardDog]

The results of a major UK survey into disability benefits has suggested that 49% of the public support these benefits and would support more being spent on them in the future even if it meant higher taxes. This seems to fly in the face of everything the government is telling us about the need to reduce them.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4grdk95vgno

Decisions have trade offs. All countries had (have) covid, yes. All countries did not go into the pandemic with equal pandemic readiness, health services that could/couldn’t cope to varying degrees, access to vaccination, access to anti virals, differing responses to spreading, educating their public - from the start of the pandemic to now.

And again being defined as disabled doesn’t automatically mean they are on benefits.

The retirement age in France is 64 for those born 1968 or later. The automatic pensionable age is 67 regardless of the number of years worked but the contribution requirements are up to 43 years to get a full pension at the legal retirement age.

The problem is not fraud. The number of people who are claiming disability benefits fraudulently is very low. The problem is the overall numbers claiming, which has ballooned since Covid. Unfortunately stricter/narrower eligibility inevitably screens out genuine disability.

And the problem that you’ve identified here is that no government has the appetite to look at pensioners because it’s a vote loser. So the next in line are the disabled - they effectively have no voice if my experience of the various charities and organisations supposed to speak for them is anything to go by.

Young adults going from DLA to PIP will account for some of that. Also, some adults are still on DLA (I am not sure of the figures). I have a friend in his 60s who is still on DLA, and has been for over 20 years.

It is not too disimilar to all the claims about how UC claims are going up, when people wer migrating over from legacy benefits like tax credits and ESA. Those people were already in the system and on benefits. The name changed.

How do we know real fraud is low? How would anyone ever detect that someone say could use a bath when they had persuaded everyone they couldn't?

I’m not yet 50 but I have accepted that, despite the vast sums of tax and NI I pay, I won’t receive a pension. The country simply can’t afford it.
It is shit, but it is what it is, I vote, but I can’t change what is happening at government level.
But @Apotatoyousay I would question your statement that most people who could be awarded PIP don’t claim it. Where are the stats to back that up? Or that “fraud is negligible”. There are, understandably, no accurate statistics for that. Only fraud that is caught is recorded.

No one gets PIP for not being to get in and out the bath as an isolated thing.
It would be one of many things they struggle with, and would be documented with their doctor etc.
Unless you think there should be a bath set up in the offices where PIP assessments take place, so they can ask people to get in an out of it?

Yes I know it is a number of things. But still pretty self reported. You have a diagnosed condition, but you report how it affects you.
For example, I don't get pip because I can walk about 200 metres, but can't do stairs and use a wheelchair outside. It's a diagnosed condition. But if I said I could only walk thirty metres no one would know if that was true or not. It would still be consistent with my diagnosis. So I could easily lie if I wanted to.

Exactly! And what does “documented with their doctor” even mean? You’ve told your doctor you can’t do it? Does that make it true?
Does no one ever lie to their doctor? And are doctors somehow magically supposed to “know” if someone is lying or exaggerating in the what, 5 minutes they have to see every patient? I think not.

Why are you assuming that people are lying?
This is what the press is trying to do... get you look at anyone on PIP with suspicion. You have fallen for it.

Because not being able to get in and out of a bath is only a small part of the assessment and there would need to be medical evidence to support the claim. Other aspects of the claimants condition and how they present overall, would also have to demonstrate that on the balance of probability the claimant is telling the truth.

And that’s why assessors will make up their own minds based on what they see and what the claimant tells them. You’ve clearly fallen for the rhetoric that PIP is an easy benefit to claim and all you have to do is rock up and say the right things. The numbers having to go to tribunal to get a fair decision say otherwise.

Why are you assuming that people aren’t lying?
And why do you assume I’ve “fallen for” whatever the press might say, rather than my own, lived experience? Which is equally as relevant as yours.

If someone tells their doctor that they struggle to get in and out the bath, then what do you think should happen?
Do think their GP should do a home visit and watch them try and get in and out the bath before they will document it on their notes?
Someone struggling with getting in and out the bath will also struggle in other ways that are consistent with what they are self reporting to their GP.

It is sad their is the assumption that people are lying/exaggerating, and also that the doctors and HCPs involved in their care are thick and gullible too.

I’ve been in disability support for over twenty years and I’ve never seen anyone lie to get a PIP award. The medical evidence - both provided by the claimant themselves and that of the assessor - has to support what the claimant is saying about how their condition affects them, and the reported effects a likely consequence of their condition.

Yep, this.

No more “sad” than your assumption that I’ve fallen for whatever the press might say.
And yes, self reporting needs to be reduced, massively. I have a diagnosed and documented medical condition which could legitimately make me unable to work, walk or live without support. For me, fortunately, it doesn’t. I could EASILY report that it does and claim. Who is going to check? No one does. And that is part of the problem.

And what IS this rhetoric that anyone who thinks benefit needs reviewing has “fallen for” whatever the press might say? Do you assume we all just read the Daily Mail and never leave the house? Or that we don’t all have our own lives and our own lived experiences of the benefit system? They might not align with yours but I’m not sure why you feel yours is superior or more accurate.

Hook, line and sinker.

Self reporting just means something that your GP/HCP/consultant has not witnessed themselves.

Are you actually saying that people should only get PIP if every tiny aspect of their disability can be observed by someone with particular qualifications?

So a whole house set up in the DWP offices. Watch someone try to cook a meal, try to use the loo, try to climb the stairs etc.
For mental health, you are basically going to try and make someone have a panic attack to prove their eligibility.

I can not see anyone in health/social care get on board with this.

I don’t know what percentage tax you pay, OP, but what would you like to increase it to?

I haven’t said l would like it increased. I said that responders to the survey had said that they would like to see disability benefits increased, even if that meant paying more tax.

Really? Well, as someone who can count, I can’t see how we can continue to pay at the levels we are.
And how patronising is the “hook” comment? You don’t help your argument that way.
And yes, there might come a time when I might need to claim. When my condition becomes such that it cannot be managed. At that point, I’d have zero issue with someone actually turning up to make sure what I say is true. Why would anyone? We have finite resources, not, despite what some might want to believe, a bottomless pit. They need allocating appropriately and I have no problem with people checking if what I’m saying is true.

Ok, but how much more would you personally be prepared to pay?