I agree with the benefit cuts for promoting

[Canaryhead]

I am on disability and universal credit and I don’t work (which will change when I get the support to some part time work, and I have been in contact with a disability charity). I get points for a physical disability and a cognitive disability. I do have severe mental health issues which I am working on but I don’t claim for it.
So I can see that currently you can score 2 points across a number of categories for needing prompting. And I can see how that relates to mental health, and if you score enough you would then get the full amount of the care component, with the full mobility component if you say you need to have someone with you for your mental health condition (I agree they need someone with them but they shouldn’t be able to use that money to pay for a mobility car in my opinion if they aren’t physically or cognitively disabled) For neurodivergence you would get more than two points as it comes with executive functioning difficulties that have an impact for the majority of the time, harm to yourself and others, so you could argue you're needing supervision and things take longer like for example in processing and tiredness.
if a family and their children are claiming full pip and DLA and associated benefits because they need prompting to do tasks (sorry if I’ve got this wrong and it’s not possible) and are getting thousands for it all combined then I agree that’s so wrong and needs to stop. And I could also see how that allows the family to spend that money on lots of nice things.
people with more expensive disabilities are getting the same rates with more significant costs. I have had to make do with two pairs of leggings from the factory shop that have split apart at the seams and can’t be repaired because of the quality, and I have just been gifted money to buy better quality leggings.
If I am wrong about how I feel towards those that are on full pip for needing prompting, I wouldn’t mind being corrected

Some physical disabilities can be improved too. My son is currently physically disabled, he wasn't born that way and we're hoping that with physio, it won't be something that will affect him forever.

I think people are assuming that I agree with the green paper cuts, which I honestly haven’t read fully. I just agree with the cutting of the prompting criteria

So.... All the other areas of the assessment are absolutely fine, except the one where you don't score any points - so that's the one that is open to abuse and needs axing?

No.
Everyone is fully understanding of your opinion.

Sorry you're right. I mixed moving around with the totality of the Mobility criteria.

You and others have engaged in rhetorical posturing about how she will lose her disability benefits. Sure, that’s not a personal threat of something you are directly planning to do to her, but it’s still an implied threat. I’ve had people attack me on MN in exactly this way too. There is huge resistance on here to disabled women voicing unpopular opinions, and if you do try to do this you will get viciously attacked, just like OP is. People claim to be empathetic and sympathetic in the same thread as being unbelievably vicious to OP!

The moment you start implying or outright stating that OP is going to lose her benefits, you have done exactly the same thing that you claim to be so outraged over her doing.

This.

She’s perfectly entitled to her view, and it’s WORIADS. Note that multiple comments have been deleted because the attacks on her have been so vicious.

Prompting isn't just being reminded..
When I cared for someone with Dementia, they didn't know how to take medication, didn't even know what it was. We would hand it to them, explain what it was and assist them on how they pop it in their mouth...that was classed as Prompting.

When working in a 24 hour supported accommodation with individuals with mental illness. In psychosis some thought food was poisoned, and suffered very extreme paranoia. Encouraging them they were safe and they would be ok to eat something, recooking food again so they could see it being made and was "safe" that is also classed as Prompting. As they can physically swallow, they have no specific physical reason to be unable to do these activities but do require extensive Prompting.

That would be higher rate PIP Prompting. Some illnesses fluctuate, they may have a month managing then have a flare up or relapse. You can't just review them on a week by week basis. You also can't put them on low because they might be alright for a bit. PIP for many individuals I cared for paid for a % of care hours. That's in mental illnesses too.

This is where difficulties lie, you can't just assume and guess at how disabilities impact people. One illness can present vastly differently in another person.

You are quite literally piling on someone for not writing well enough after she has said she has a cognitive disability that affects her writing skills. And you think you’re on the side of right…?

For God's sake read the green paper. There is no proposal to cut the "prompting" criteria. You need to understand the changes as they could very well affect you.

Definitely agree with this, every disabled person should read the Green Paper.

100% This

I don't know what WORIADS is.

OP is out and out insulting and attacking people who too are affected by what will happen.

I stand by everything I've said.

No, i really haven't. If you think I've threatened her, report me. Otherwise, sit down.

I'm asking the op to put herself in the shoes of the disabled people who are currently deemed worthy, (through a rigorous, confusing and sometimes traumatic application process) of the benefits that SHE thinks should be stripped from THEM on the basis that she doesn't think they should be entitled to them, and to consider how she would feel if someone did the same thing to her.

Strange that you've got nothing to say about the op's opinions towards disabled people? All I've said is i don't care what people claim as it's none of my business but maybe she could try putting herself in other people's shoes. Not quite sure why you're so upset about my opinion, but not hers.

I believe they’re obviously entitled, they are a danger to themselves and don’t have cognitive ability. but someone who ONLY claims for prompting with no other issues can get full pip.

@Canaryhead this is the change being proposed. Nothing to do with "cutting the prompting criteria"

Changing the eligibility for the Daily Living component of PIP. At the moment, PIP claimants score points against a list of criteria in their assessment. These criteria are called activities. A claimant must score at least 8 points to qualify for PIP. These points can add up to 8 across different activities. Under the new rules, claimants will still need to score at least 8 points in the assessment. But they must score 4 points in a single activity.

@Canaryhead

I'm interested that you keep saying 'claiming full PIP' and that you have a particular issue with 'prompting'.
As you are a PIP claimant you will know that points are awarded across a range of categories and that there are different levels of award.
Nobody 'claims' full PIP.
You submit your application, the DWP makes the award.
I don't understand why you seem to think you can claim full PIP just for prompting when it's clearly not the case

If you get 2 points for prompting across every question, then they can

I don’t decided I was just stating my opinion And I’m not saying my opinion is right either.
If you don’t know what I’m saying, You’re only responding to your interpretations of what I’ve said, which are probably wrong and they are

I’m responding to the fact you are spouting possibly the most ableist shit I’ve ever read on here, and that’s saying something.

Just because you are “disabled” you don’t get to decide how disabled other people are. I don’t actually believe you are disabled to be honest; no one with any form of disability could be this prejudiced.

Well I haven’t done what you’ve said I’ve done. It’s just your interpretation

I notice you’ve been unable to say what your source is for believing people are lying on the mental health sections for PIP.

And what you believe is “deserving” enough.

You keep mentioning promoting. You realise that needing someone with you to “prompt” you can involve quite a lot of work ? Times, dates, keeping a track of if the person being cared for has had a shower, eaten, taken medicine and which ones. Plus if they need to be present when the disabled person leaves the house to make sure they get home again ? “Prompting” can mean a LOT of guidance.

If you don’t have a husband or partner who does this ?? The disabled person would likely have to pay someone to do it.

Why is that not deserving enough ?

I suspect that those who simply claim that they need prompting and someone with them when out because they feel anxious with literally no other issues don’t have significant enough needs and could be lying about being disabled by their condition

Again do you have any evidence for this ?