Benefits claimant dies

Scroll to see replies

I don't agree that the money is being spent on trivia; it is being spent on the general household needs of poor families, but that isn't what it is designed for. Let's be clear, it isn't designed for what you put it to either.

Where did you get that from? Some of us do have extra household costs due to our disabilities.

There is no law to say what pip / dla has to be spent on.

Reply 101

Ladbants

These stories are always quite fishy and are always reported mainly by left wing media to try and smear conservatives and encourage more benefits pending.

Reply 102

nulli tertius

Original post by Tiger Rag

Where did you get that from? Some of us do have extra household costs due to our disabilities.

There is no law to say what pip / dla has to be spent on.

Of course some people have extra household costs, but, partcularly in the case of juvenile DLA claimants, their parents frequently don't have significant extra costs

There is no law to say what it has to be spent on, but there is government policy going back from PIP through DLA, Attendance Allowance and Constant Attendance Allowance that it is for the additional costs of disability.

Reply 103

Tiger Rag

Original post by nulli tertius

However, their parents may have to give up work reduce their hours. Their child may because home more (as I was) due to their disability, therefore, they may have extra heating costs.

Reply 104

nulli tertius

Original post by Ladbants

These stories are always quite fishy and are always reported mainly by left wing media to try and smear conservatives and encourage more benefits pending.

You mean like the Daily Mail

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4510032/Disabled-mother-died-days-benefits-appeal-rejected.html

Reply 105

nulli tertius

Original post by Tiger Rag

However, their parents may have to give up work reduce their hours. Their child may because home more (as I was) due to their disability, therefore, they may have extra heating costs.

I would venture to suggest that you are massively untypical of most juvenile DLA recipients.

Reply 106

Sammylou40

Original post by nulli tertius

I would venture to suggest that you are massively untypical of most juvenile DLA recipients.

Why? Do you not think a large majority of working parents cut hours to support children with disabilities?
And if they don’t specialised childcare costs more
You seem to think the conditions you’ve listed are trivial. They’re not.

Reply 107

nulli tertius

Original post by Sammylou40

Why? Do you not think a large majority of working parents cut hours to support children with disabilities?

No I don't. i think very few parents adjust their working hours to deal with a child with autism, ADHD, learning disabilities and asthma which comprise the vast majority of all disabled children in the UK.

And if they don’t specialised childcare costs more

If specialist childcare is being engaged, which I would suggest it very rarely is.

Let's say you have a couple with a disabled child of 4 and a non-disabled child of 2.

How many fewer hours are that couple working than an equivalent family with a non-disabled child of 4 and a non-disabled child of 2?

You seem to think the conditions you’ve listed are trivial. They’re not.

They are not trivial but they are inexpensive.

Reply 108

Tiger Rag

Original post by Sammylou40

Exactly. I have friends with disabled children who can only work term time because of the lack of suitable childcare.

Reply 109

Tiger Rag

Original post by nulli tertius

Many of those children will also have other disabilities too.

Reply 110

username1148663

Original post by nulli tertius

I am not saying "no", but:

•

You are turning your back on the working disabled

•

The costs associated with physically disabled children can be very high

•

There would be a very big fall off in income for the disabled in attaining pension age

•

There remains the tension in ESA whether it is a "day by day" or long term benefit

•

It turns a non-means tested into a means-tested benefit

•

There is also a tension in ESA whether it should address employability or misfortune. Cameron when PM took up as local MP the cause of some ex-seviceman who had lost his leg on active service and had "rightly" been turned down for ESA. One could well think "Douglas Bader flew Spitires with tin legs; why can't you push a pen?" The relapsing alcoholic or heroin addict is almost certainly unemployable

I really don’t care about the costs they are minuscule compared to what the government spends over all and there is a principal involved with how we treat people who aren’t likely to be employed whilst they qualify for disability benefits.

Reply 111

nulli tertius

Original post by paul514

What I mean is that your proposal just takes money out of the hands of the children whom Tiger Rag is fighting for. If you get rid of DLA/PIP and add it on to ESA, severely disabled children now get nothing because they aren't claiming ESA.

Reply 112

username1148663

Original post by nulli tertius

I don’t really follow the point.

We can simply have a benefit just for children or allow children to claim esa or simply provide everything that child would need such as home modifications.

Reply 113

nulli tertius

Original post by Tiger Rag

Many of those children will also have other disabilities too.

Some of them do, but not so many. Even in a parental survey which is likely to overstate disabilities through misunderstanding the question, only about 10% claim any visual impairment (and many of these will simply be children who wear glasses where the survey answer should have been "no" and under 30% claim mobility problems (and again the question will be misunderstood and the answers given about children where there are behavioral difficulties in mobilising)

Reply 114

nulli tertius

Original post by paul514

I don’t really follow the point.

We can simply have a benefit just for children or allow children to claim esa or simply provide everything that child would need such as home modifications.

Yes we can, but that isn't what you suggested.

You suggested the way to deal with the problems of PIP/DLA was to roll it into ESA. I was highlighting that the problem of child claimants was one, but only one, of the drawbacks to doing so.

It is lot easier to pick holes in the system, as almost every sensible contribution to the thread has being doing, that to create a better system.

(edited 6 years ago)

Reply 115

username1148663

Original post by nulli tertius

I was highlighting we should just give people who aren’t able to work through disability more money and scrap PIP.

Reply 116

nulli tertius

Original post by Tiger Rag

Exactly. I have friends with disabled children who can only work term time because of the lack of suitable childcare.

And if the children were not disabled, would the parents have been able to work through the holidays?

Reply 117

Napp

Original post by Ladbants

These stories are always quite fishy and are always reported mainly by left wing media to try and smear conservatives and encourage more benefits pending.

Are you asserting that this in fact, pardon the term, 'fake news' and this lady infact did not die then?

Let us look at an alternative theory to your cute one though, that in fact no smearing of the reactionary tub thumpers is actually required due to you all being thoroughly slimey and thus there is no need to 'smear conservatives'

Reply 118

username2243339

Sickening. The "sanctioning" aka punishment system needs to go.

Reply 119

Sammylou40

Original post by nulli tertius

And if the children were not disabled, would the parents have been able to work through the holidays?

The difference being SPECIALISED child care
What is very clear from your posts is that you have extensive knowledge of the system and zero experience of living with a disability