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

So I am literally referring to the characters taking advantage that the media portray if they exist. and I believe that removing the prompting criteria in particular would stop that if it is happening. I can’t currently see how removing that particular criteria would catch anyone with a disability. Someone with dementia for example is a danger to themselves and others and would score higher points in other areas. Same with other conditions like bipolar and schizophrenia. if you have a disability you could say you are either unsafe, in pain or don’t have the cognitive ability most of the time depending on what it is. But simply saying you need prompting and feel anxious without another person I feel is wrong. If you shut down and lose your ability to get around because you are overwhelmed, that’s different and
another story to simply claiming that you feel a bit anxious.

So actually you’ve no proof, no idea that if exists but think it’s a good thing disabled people should loose their benefits because of the media portraying something ?

Have I got that right ?

You don’t understand how removing needing prompting - something that literally can keep a disabled person safe - will have an impact because they could just make something up on the other criteria ?

In which case why do you believe people on those criteria aren’t also lying ?

If what the media is saying are true, that the character they potray exists, then that needs to stop, and I believe it can be stopped by removing the prompting criteria, is what I am saying.
people with the level of disability that the money is intended for could argue for higher points. Because they are unable to do things safely and repeatedly, and without pain most of the time

But it’s not as simple as embellishing symptoms to gain more points. The assessor will cross check this. They’ll speak to your GP, psychiatrist, psychologist. I found claiming PIP really stressful.

Why ? Why can no one lie about any of the other criteria ?

Why can someone just say they they need an aid or appliance when they don’t ?

Except you have, you’ve decided that people who score points in the prompting category are not disabled enough and by virtue, shouldn’t receive monetary help.

You haven’t considered that some of these people might have had these points for pip allocated by the assessor without the assessor taking into account what they should actually score. Many people do not have the know how or energy to take assessments to appeal.

You haven’t considered that those who don’t actually get the help required don’t mention that they actually need it even if they don’t revive it and it’s quite possible that people underplay the help the need particularly those who don’t have help to complete the forms.

You haven’t considered what prompting can actually mean. Someone may need constant prompting, encouragement, cajoling, reassurance, etc. it can take an hour upwards to get my adult child’s teeth cleaned. Getting them prepared for a trip to the hospital starts days before. Hair washing and brushing can take 2 hours,
Persuading them to eat and drink, toilet prompting, having to be with them because they have to be watched constantly as they are a danger to them selves (whilst of course ‘prompting’) is constant.

You may not have started this post to upset but it is upsetting, and ableist and also arrogant that you have decided what makes someone disabled and also that you’re not even listening to anyone who has posted in response to you except to state that your opinion on prompting is correct 😡

I said that I believe that the prompting criteria should be removed because if you are disabled by your condition, you could argue for more points as you are unable to do something safely, consistently, reliably and without pain for most of the time.
removing the ability to get full pip for prompting alone would weed out people who are not actually disabled by their condition (that’s if they even have one and are not faking it like the media portray people are) It leaves no opportunity to exaggerate or fake.
your child is a danger to themselves and others and doesn’t have cognitive ability so they should be getting points for more than prompting.

Again what makes you think someone would t lie about being in pain, not being able to walk or needing mobility aids ?

I think it’s very difficult to lie about that and they would be caught.

How ?

How can you prove someone is not too much pain to hold down a job ? Or to cook food ?

I have nerve pain. There is nothing physically visibly “wrong” with me as such. Just that my nerves don’t work. It can’t be seen. It is a diagnosis of exclusion.

How would you prove or disprove someone in my position is not in pain ? That they have to lie down several times a day to rest ? That therefore they cannot cook for themselves at all or would need assistance to do so ? Or that they need assistance to wash ?

There isn’t any evidence. There have been tests in the past that prove I don’t have X Y or Z. But no one can prove or disprove whether I am in pain or not. I take medication for nerve pain. Again there is no way other than my saying it - to prove it works or doesn’t.

As it happens it does work. But someone could quite easily say otherwise.

You’re now questioning the descriptor of “ Prompting”? Is it beyond your understanding that someone who is near catatonic with major depression or a psychotic episode can be so removed that days can go by without eating drinking washing, taking medication on schedule.. or even forgetting to go to the toilet?
I can, as I’ve been there with my bipolar diagnosis From the depths of depression to the highs of mania
I also have Moderate Cerebral Palsy, and in every aspect of daily living I am literally a liability.
Broaden your outlook and realise disabilities affect everyone differently.

'I said that I believe that the prompting criteria should be removed because if you are disabled by your condition, you could argue for more points as you are unable to do something safely, consistently, reliably and without pain for most of the time.
removing the ability to get full pip for prompting alone would weed out people who are not actually disabled by their condition (that’s if they even have one and are not faking it like the media portray people are) It leaves no opportunity to exaggerate or fake.
your child is a danger to themselves and others and doesn’t have cognitive ability so they should be getting points for more than prompting.'

I suggest you step away from 'media' if you believe that gaining pip can be achieved by faking illness.

I never said my child doesn't have cognitive ability. They are still a danger to themselves and it takes an age to do things, with prompting

You also don't need a 'condition' to get pip, it may be easier with a diagnosis but it's based on what you need or can't do rather than what your illness or disability is.

Again, whilst you should be able to score higher than 2 in categories, this is quite often not the case, depending upon who carries out the assessment, removing the prompting category would also remove pip from those who are also genuinely entitled.

@Canaryhead you don't know what you're talking about. Why bother starting a thread on a topic you know nothing about and making yourself look stupid?

I did say I was open to information and changing my mind

So after a lot of thought I have changed my mind, I can see why my thread and the things I was saying were inflammatory and I’m very sorry to say the least.
The assessors don’t give the correct points so they are given points for prompting for example when they need supervision.
There’s a lot of evidence you need to submit for mental health as well. I was under the impression you could just say whatever you wanted and be believed. And to need prompting to do tasks means your condition is severe. I was honestly under the impression you could just claim you were a bit anxious, lie about a few things and claim full pip because of the media and the characters they portray. But after a lot of thought I don’t think that the character the media portrays exists, and I think it’s to make people claiming disability suspects and try to hate against them.

1. Whilst you're rubbing your hands with glee about not qualifying because you've only scored 2 points on each activity, have you realised how this will impact people with physical disabilities? You for example currently score 2 points because Needs assistance to be able to wash either their hair or body below the waist. 2 points.

There's a few other criteria where you'd score 2 points if you have a physical disability

@Canaryhead While I didn’t agree with your initial opinion about the prompting criteria, I think it’s sad and very telling how the MN posters reacted to you, as a disabled poster yourself, expressing an “unapproved” opinion. You were consistently polite but received a torrent of abuse in response to your post. I wish I could say I was surprised but sadly, I am not. However, it is ironic that these posters think they have the moral high ground and are standing up for disabled people… while literally coming onto MN to directly abuse disabled people just for expressing an opinion.

Oh come on.

OP said some pretty offensive things relating to other disabled people and people robustly challenged her. She didn't get a torrent of abuse. I don't know what the handful of deleted posts said, but the remaining ones are not abusive.

She now says she has changed her mind. So all good!

Well it would have helped if the OP had actually read enough to understand the argument she was trying to make as a first step. She posted with little grasp.of any of the issues as she subsequently admitted so why start a bun fight in the first place ?

And whilst their is no excuse for rudeness some of us are fed up of the endless threads questioning why people should be entitled to.disability benefits in the first place. They think they know better than the medical profession and even the posters themselves in some cases.
The vitriol on here and in the wider media towards disabled adults and even children is breathtaking at times . I would like to see the response if other protected groups were targeted but heigh ho it is fine to kick disabled people when they are down and scared of the future even sometimes on the board specifically set up.for them to discuss and support each other.
Disabled and sick people are being increasingly scapegoatsed in this country and that is why peoples patience is wearing thin and tempers are fraying.

@flapjackfairy

That
Exactly.

Honestly, I don’t agree; I think a lot of the posts that remain are nasty enough to be considered abusive. I don’t even agree with the OP myself as I personally would maybe slightly reframe or reword “prompting”, but certainly would never remove it; there are many strong arguments (as outlined by posters) for keeping it there. I don’t think she was wrong to share her opinion, though. It’s a common view and it’s worthwhile for other MN posters to see point by point rebuttals, but that doesn’t mean there should be such nasty personal remarks to a disabled person. For example, multiple people attacking her writing after she was upfront about having a cognitive disability.

I am a severely disabled person so I’m highly aware of these issues. But I don’t agree with you that they shouldn’t be freely discussed by anyone and everyone. We just have a major difference of opinion, here. I don’t think disagreeing justifies the kind of attacks that this OP received, for example the people who attacked her writing (with some very rude and nasty implications), despite her saying upfront that she has a cognitive disability affecting her expressive skills.

I think it’s a good thing for other people on MN to see threads like this that chew over the issue. I personally would never have been in favour of ditching the “prompting” category (maybe some slight edits, but never removing it), however I bet a lot of non disabled people think similarly to OP’s original view, and haven’t considered, for instance, how a condition like dementia might require help in this category. People lurking these threads benefit from educational responses.

Do you not think that other protected groups will also consist of disabled people too? For your information they are attacked regularly on Mumsnet too, and they do not do much about it, so think about what you are saying.

sorry ? I don't think I ever said there shouldn't be the right to open discussion on this issue or any other for that matter. Please show me where I said that!
I also said rudeness is not acceptable.
But I stand by the point I was mostly making in that if you attempt to robustly debate a point you should at the v least have a good grasp of what you are actually standing up for. If not then yes you look a bit silly and are likely to be discredited pretty quickly. .
And I also maintain that people are tetchy because of the vitriol and underhand abuse being meeted out to those with disabilities on benefits. It is all over the media at present and I have seen huge swing towards resentment of disabled adults and children for costing the taxpayers etc etc.