off work with breast cancer what can i claim help!!

James123_2

As a general point, given the trauma and emotional upheaval that cancer throws at individuals, the State should be more willing to assist in such circumstances. Whether you call this IB, DLA etc a lot of seriously ill people do have to spend much of their time chasing departments to secure some financial help. In this country, with the huge amount earmarked for SS, I feel this to be unacceptable.

Oldernotwiser

James123 wrote: »

As a general point, given the trauma and emotional upheaval that cancer throws at individuals, the State should be more willing to assist in such circumstances. Whether you call this IB, DLA etc a lot of seriously ill people do have to spend much of their time chasing departments to secure some financial help. In this country, with the huge amount earmarked for SS, I feel this to be unacceptable.

But you don't normally get benefits for trauma and emotional upheaval. ESA/IB is for living expenses for people who are unable to work because of ill health and disabilities, whereas DLA is to pay for the extra expenses incurred if you have mobility and care needs.

Benefits aren't given as compensation because life has dealt someone a crummy hand. Unfortunately, there are too many people who believe this to be the case and they're bound to be disappointed when they find it isn't so.

SuziQ

I agree with oldernotwiser. You should show the range of good/worst days on a dla application and you can then give an indication of the ratio between good/worst. This is what I did for my son's application and he was awarded HRC. To have just described his worst day would have been wholly inaccurate and would probably have given him HRM also,but I believe that would have been wrong and he was awarded LRM which I feel is correct. An unbalanced application is going to be scrutinised and you may be called in to discuss the claim. OP I hope you are keeping positive and I wish you all the best. I will be 'under the knife' 2 weeks today so know pretty much how you are feeling,but the difference for me is that I had to sort my finances a year ago and the only change for me will be a reduction in my IS if I stay in more than 7 nights (well that's what the helpline told me, my lone parent advisor said under 2 weeks they won't take benefit off so it will be interesting to see!)

James123_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

But you don't normally get benefits for trauma and emotional upheaval. ESA/IB is for living expenses for people who are unable to work because of ill health and disabilities, whereas DLA is to pay for the extra expenses incurred if you have mobility and care needs.

Benefits aren't given as compensation because life has dealt someone a crummy hand. Unfortunately, there are too many people who believe this to be the case and they're bound to be disappointed when they find it isn't so.

To dismiss a cancer diagnosis as merely 'being dealt a crummy hand' shows an absolute lack of compassion and understanding about the disease. Equally, it's not a matter of individuals wanting 'compensation' for their 'crummy hand'. It's about basic living expenses until/if things get better. The sums involved are small and, for most, hard-won. Give it any label you like IB/DLA etc the State should support those who can't support themselves through ill health otherwise there's little point in contributing into the System. Equally, the process should be streamlined to avoid much of unecessary paper-chase. You seem intent upon commenting on sentences out of context. You clearly have a large axe to grind.

patchwork_cat

HAving read this thread I do feel that oldernotwiser does seem to be lacking in compassion.

Oldernotwiser

James123 wrote: »

To dismiss a cancer diagnosis as merely 'being dealt a crummy hand' shows an absolute lack of compassion and understanding about the disease. Equally, it's not a matter of individuals wanting 'compensation' for their 'crummy hand'. It's about basic living expenses until/if things get better. The sums involved are small and, for most, hard-won. Give it any label you like IB/DLA etc the State should support those who can't support themselves through ill health otherwise there's little point in contributing into the System. Equally, the process should be streamlined to avoid much of unecessary paper-chase. You seem intent upon commenting on sentences out of context. You clearly have a large axe to grind.

Perhaps you missed my post where I stated that I'd had breast cancer? I really don't think that you need to try to browbeat me about the situation. I also think that the days when people muttered about "the big C" are long gone; there are many equally distressing and life threatening illnesses and there's no reason for cancer patients to receive more or less than someone with one of these conditions.

I also have no axe to grind but feel that people come here for accurate information and statements like "Give it any label you like IB/DLA etc " are unhelpful to anyone. My information was intended to clarify what the two benefits are for, in the hopes that this might promote understanding of them for new people. Claimants need to know what the different benefits are for and what are the criteria for claiming them. I know my parents wasted a lot of time on an AA application because they didn't realise that it was only for care needs and had nothing to do with mobility.

I agree with you that the process could be quicker but I think that people with disabilities and medical conditions are quite well financed (if you add housing costs into the equation) in this country. If the process is sometimes slow, perhaps you should blame the numbers of people who apply in ignorance, much less fraudulently. When people are advised that they might as well apply regardless, ("don't ask, don't get") all it does is clog up the system so that those with more urgent needs have to wait longer.

James123_2

No, I saw your post regarding your breast cancer. This was the reason that I’ve been surprised by your posts.

I don’t want to get into a spat about the semantics of the issue. However, I’d respectfully suggest that your comments here and on my own posts are bordering on dismissive of the very real difficulties many of us face with cancer. As I'm sure you know, it's not one disease in itself, but an umbrella term for some 200 diseases – all with different therapies and survival rates. As such, it's difficult to generalise about the implications for individuals. Cancer still claims a high proportion of its victims. I still think that ‘The Big C’ is the unmentionable amongst people generally. Your own experience of cancer was, thankfully, that you were able to walk away from the whole experience intact. That is wonderful. Unfortunately this is not my own experience.

I’d still maintain that cancer patients, arguably along with other life-threatening illnesses, should be fast-tracked and treated as special cases. The chemotherapy ward, of which I’m familiar, is full of patients who have considerable money worries. I find this galling. It’s not for nothing that there is a need for Macmillan Benefits Advisors. And, just because there are other equally distressing illnesses does not make cancer any less distressing in itself.


I’d agree that DLA is not a divine right for cancer patients. The lady who started this thread has Stage 3 cancer which, presumably, meant that she had secondaries. As such, DLA might have been appropriate - although neither of us can answer that. Clearly, some live with active cancer for generations without problems - or even knowledge. In which case, benefits would be highly inappropriate. My own cancer is very aggressive - NHL.

The first thought of a cancer patient isn’t how to extract the most money from the State or to seek recompense. My point was that cancer is a disease which can develop in an entirely unpredictable manner. Whatever label you give a particular benefit it should acknowledge this when offering support and be a little flexible in its application. I, like you, don’t think it should be a meal ticket for life. I just think that those with life-threatening illnesses should be given unqualified support if they’re unable to work.

Finally, I'm sorry if you felt I was brow-beating you. Indeed, I probably was. However, this is a particularly sensitive issue. I just feel that your generally excellent advice would be best served if your posts were to come across as alittle less judgemental. If they're intended otherwise, I apologise.

qwertyuiop12345

James123 wrote: »

I’d still maintain that cancer patients, arguably along with other life-threatening illnesses, should be fast-tracked and treated as special cases.

I feel it is appallingly wrong to suggest that cancer patients should be fast-tracked and treated differently to people with other conditions. Personally I find this kind of heirarchy of illnesses/dissabilities very offensive and think it shows incredibly insensitivity to people in situations other than your own.

All chronically ill and disabled people should be treated equally and have the same rights.

P.S. Before you claim that I think this because I don't understand "the big C", I should point out that I have Leukaemia.

James123_2

qwertyuiop12345 wrote: »

I feel it is appallingly wrong to suggest that cancer patients should be fast-tracked and treated differently to people with other conditions. Personally I find this kind of heirarchy of illnesses/dissabilities very offensive and think it shows incredibly insensitivity to people in situations other than your own.

Please read the quote YOU yourself have used from my own 'essay'. I said cancer, along with other life-threatening illnesses.

Glad you agree!

fairydiamond

qwertyuiop12345 wrote: »

I feel it is appallingly wrong to suggest that cancer patients should be fast-tracked and treated differently to people with other conditions. Personally I find this kind of heirarchy of illnesses/dissabilities very offensive and think it shows incredibly insensitivity to people in situations other than your own.

Eh? You think people diagnosed with cancer should wait in a 5-month queue for an opeartion? Whats wrong with beng fast-tracked?

In a sense I disagree. My partner rings for a doctors' appointment and he'll get seen immediately. I have to wait about a week. I don't care. He's been through more health worries and far more s*** than I have.

People with serious illnesses and diseases should get fast tracked. I don't see a problem with this.