Tories considering benefit review for people with drug and obesity problems.

[meglet]

I have to be really angry to start a thread in this topic .

Cutting benefits for people with addiction problems is surely only going to lead to them committing more crime to raise the money for drugs? Seeing as mental health support is already virtually nonexistent I can't imagine how they think this is going to work.

bbc link

Viv I wish I had your optimism. You realise don't you, that there will be no new money to fund this (and it'll cost a lot to develop and users may need long term support). No, they only want to be seen to be implementing this 'scheme' before the election but it's lip service only. They don't give a shit actually.

Viv, please pay careful attention.

About 10 years ago I was referred for NICE-approved treatment for M.E. by my GP, who praised the "treatment" to the skies.

I pushed hard through my GP's administrative incompetence to make sure the promise of treatment became an actual appointment, and went eagerly to the programme. When I arrived, I realised early on that it was likely to make me worse, and that the basis of the programme was unscientific gibberish. I did not continue with it. The GP accused me of refusing treatment.

About two years ago, I got another referral, this time to a consultant neurologist. Who informed me I'd been quite right to refuse the programme. Her exact words were, "That would have killed you." I hope that was hyperbole, but it would certainly have extended the very worst period of my illness for some years had I been foolish enough to follow the "treatment." During those worst years I was unable to cook a proper meal, change my own bed, clean my own toilet, or sit upright for half an hour. I was also in pain quite a bit.

Are you still reading?

Good.

Tell me. Would you, personally, Viviennemary, penalise me, PausingFlatly, for making that decision about my health? A decision which has been proven right - not least by my condition vastly improving.

And no, this isn't some anomalous, peripheral example. This is the heart of what we are talking about. Refusal of M.E. "treatment" was cited on this thread almost on the first page.

This is a yes/no question.

No pointing in another direction or waving your hands required.

Points in other direction and waves hands. No. I was thinking about people who were very overweight or addicted to drugs because that's what the OP has said in her first post. And I assumed it would be counselling and not forced operations and drug treatments. Nobody in the Government has mentioned ME. If I was a drug addict I would welcome help. what's the alternative to face an early death.

Thank you for answering.

Actually, this idea has been continually mooted during the welfare restructuring, and is in no way limited to obese people or addicts.

They're merely the socially acceptable end of Shiny Dave's wedge.

Even his language in that BBC report is telling: "David Cameron has launched a review of the current system, which he says fails to encourage people with long-term, treatable issues to get medical help."

I firmly believe sugar and sweeteners are addictive. It's all very well saying don't eat them, but we are hardwired from an evolutionary perspective to eat sweet things. It used to mean survival. It's very, very hard to resist them. Hence 95% of people who lose weight regain it. There is just too much cheap sweet stuff about. Couple that with emotional problems, loneliness, depression, chronic pain....well you try successfully fighting cravings. (I'm saying this as someone who's lost and kept off 5 stones, by the way. I don't generally eat sugar, I still battle with a food addiction though and slip up a lot, and my diet is 95% perfect with masses of veggies and organic produce).

Treatment for drug addiction is notoriously rubbish. Even addicts who want to be in treatment, who are rock bottom and whose lives are at risk if they don't get into treatment have a miserable success rate. Ask any addiction therapist. There isn't enough money to get every addict into rehab. Many of them have had catastrophically awful lives, and really need a lot of input. The reality isn't that they will spend 30 days bonding with fellow addicts, come out healed and be nice, functioning members of society with a job on the tills at Asda forever more.

it's the reality of comorbid conditions as well. a lot of people with bipolar are diagnosed with addictions first - it is notoriously poorly diagnosed hence the self medication and subsequent addictions and only when some success or progress is made with the addiction treatment does the underlying mental illness get revealed and then treatment for that can at least begin (getting to the right combination of drugs and life management etc for bipolar also is known to take a long time) whilst also trying to deal with the secondary addictions and the fallout on a human life that occurs after years of untreated mental illness and addictions and yes possibly some weight issues too and all manner of trauma and other secondary issues relating from chaotic and 'out there' living that resulted from all that.

or combine being sexually abused, groomed for underage prostitution by being given addictive drugs, re: ptsd plus drug addiction plus maybe a criminal record and depression and anxiety and homelessness etc. what would your quick fix treatment option be for that? what might the doc offer that the lazy good for nothing traumatised to the point of not knowing up from down anymore 'patient' might not be able to comply with?

or maybe they didn't get groomed into prostitution, maybe they made it to 16, managed to get a bedsit and locked themselves inside with ptsd, agarophobia and a lifetime supply of sugar and put on 10st in a few years - will a prescription for WW that they can't attend due to panic attacks be good reason to take away their benefits?

we just need to think a little bit.

Yes Honeybadger. Most people would feel sympathetic for someone who's had a stroke triggered by radiotherapy, but what if the cancer for which they had radiotherapy was caused by giving oral sex? Is that bad? Or does that make them an exceptionally generous nice person? Where do we put the sympathy? Decisions, decisions.

yep the point in time matters so much do re: sympathy galore for the 10yo who has been brutally sexually and physically abused if she is put before the judging audience of dm readers at that moment, not so much 10 years later when she is an addict with a criminal record or weighs 22st and is on benefits even though it's a direct outcome of the same trauma for which she wasn't supported.

Dr Sarah Wollaston, a Tory MP, has described this as "illegal and unworkable"

www.buzzfeed.com/emilyashton/senior-tory-mp-warns-david-cameron-that-slashing-benefits-fo

She also said: “It’s really unnecessary, and it’s all part of, in my view, trying to appeal to a sort of particular group of people who see that everybody on benefits is somehow there because it’s their own fault. We shouldn’t go down this route."

yes but the government, over the last term, has made very clear they have as much regard for the opinion and professional capacity of doctors as they do the teaching profession sadly

apparently we all, no matter how better qualified, informed or experienced need to be told what to do by an uninformed, unqualified and inexperienced civil servant/politician.

disturbing to say the least when the voices in the know are overruled by the voices in power.

It is disturbing! And it's not just teachers and doctors who apparently don't know how to do their own jobs. Look at this government's stance on technology, or the economy, or the police, or the fire brigade. They cheerfully ignore experts in those fields too in favour of policy by Daily Mail reader.

allegedly a GP with 7 years minimum of HE training and in depth knowledge and relationship of a patient their condition knows less than an atos employee can know from a brief interview based on a scripted questionnaire for example.

it's been a long time that they've ignored teachers, the gtc, unions etc with regards to education and now they're doing the same with health and claiming to know more about best practice in health and medicine than those who've spent decades training and practicing in it.

clearly they've dabbled in law and justice for a long time. they've been interfering in how we raise our children and what we should eat and drink etc for some time and have always liked to interfere in how we constitue our families re: one parent or two, opposite sex partnerships or same sex, etc.

short of telling mathematicians they're doing it all wrong and employing monkeys to re-write the rule book for minimum wage, or better yet sending sanctioned jsa claimants to do it free (whilst the CEO creams billions on govt contracts of course) i'm not sure who they can arrogantly undermine next.

it appears no profession or qualification or level of training trumps a numpty in parliament now. they just know best you know regardless of qualifications, training, experience or anything.

"it appears no profession or qualification or level of training trumps a numpty in parliament now. they just know best you know regardless of qualifications, training, experience or anything."

Exactly. Ignorance is now knowledge and all opinions are equally valid. Of course, I'm guessing they don't apply that logic when it comes to their own health and well being.

or their own children's education.

It never has and never will make sense to dole out money when people need rehabilitation, support, guidance, love and care. Money in a bank account is an irresponsible form of welfare and that's why we have such a huge benefits debate because it simply doesn't help people.

Free money doesn't help people find jobs, it doesn't stop irresponsible mothers breeding like cows, it doesn't stop unfortunate people with a food addition from eating and it doesn't help addicts get clean. We need rehab centers, more social workers on the ground and a system that genuinely fixes the problem as opposed to throwing money at people expecting them to sort themselves out.

mothers breeding like cows? really?

free money doesn't help people find jobs - err no - it prevents them and their children from starving whilst they find a job dear.

breeding like cows - wow.

For what it is worth, this particular kite has been flown regularly by both Labour and Conservative politicians. The last government made this suggestion a number of times. I suspect it will be quietly dropped, just as it has been previously.

When Iain Duncan Smith was asked about this he said, "We’re not actually talking about saying we’ll take your benefits away from you if you can’t get yourself out of obesity. The problem we’ve got is that lots of people are either fearful or don’t want to take the help that’s there. We invest in the help, whether it’s to support people to get off drugs and we’ve changed all that, or whether it’s to get people into a particular mindset to reduce their weight because their health condition’s so bad."

That sets a very different tone to David Cameron's reported comments.

If you've got a treatment for obesity or addiction that works for most people who try it, the rest of us would love to hear what it is. Dieting isn't it for obesity- most people who go on diets regain the weight. Lots of addicts relapse after treatment, so whatever we're doing for them isn't it. Penalizing people for refusing a treatment that has a high failure rate doesn't seem reasonable.

That reminds me of last week's episode of "Call the Midwife"- did anybody see it? Where the bloke was caught being gay and was forced to take medication that would emasculate him, to avoid going to prison?

That happened in real life, to Alan Turing in 1952.

Well it's not practical for treating obesity.

But it might be practical for cutting the benefits bill, if that's what your real aim is.

Most of the recent restructuring is aimed at finding reasons to pay out less, dressed up in language of "helping" people.

Maria Miller was completely open in parliament that the purpose of changing from DLA to PIP was to cut the pay out by 20%. So for example, the distance one can walk before triggering PIP has been lowered from 50m to 20m. It will exclude more people.

Mothers breeding like cows? Wow i see the misogynistic Tory supporter has arrived. The two usually go hand in hand.

Though if you do know of any immaculate conceptions do phone the Guinness Book of Records because i think they would love to know about it

AddToBasket how is talking therapy going to help ME?? It's a physical illness that leaves sufferers totally drained and often in pain. This kind of thing makes me furious, think you'd change your tune if you got struck down with one of these illnesses. Also mental illness can strike anyone, who knows if one day you'll be affected, then you'll be needing all the help you can get.

750,000 people have turned to binge drinking and anti depressant prescriptions have soared, mental illness and suicide have increased since austerity/welfare cuts were introduced.

Many people who are addicted to prescription drugs because they cannot cope with life are living with the debilitating side affects of addiction.

This never ending attack on vulnerable people, people with disabilities, people who struggle with poverty is a psychopathic symptom of a government obsessed with wealth and class.

The only way out is to vote.

"Breeding like cows" That's exceptionally disrespectful
< eyebrow raise at candidkate >
Have we discovered Katie Hopkins new Mumsnet name ?

Perhaps he doesn't mention pensions cos these are paid to people at the end of their working life. Just try getting another job at 66 years of age after compulsory redundancy.... as someone in my family has found.