Dla to be replaced by pip

Two4Tuesday

oldestrocker wrote: »

The only reason I have become angry is because some on here are making allegations about me being mentally unstable, likely to OD on a mixture of alcohol & Morphine

Well you have admitted to having MH problems severe enough to warrant needing supervision/guidance out of doors (hence your claim and award of Low Rate DLA Mobility). Given your earlier comments, it seems rather hypocritical for you to claim DLA even if you are entitled to it.

oldestrocker wrote: »

Well we managed to get to the physical bit. 45 minutes into the examination and another 50mgs of Morphine Sulphate later on top of the 40mgs already taken a couple of hours earlier, he told me to take off my overcoat.

You have also mentioned your self medication of morphine sulphate on the CAG forum - very like our old Andy.

magicstrawberry

Quote:
Originally Posted by magicstrawberry
I'm really sick of this ...

The increase in the amount of ppl that feel that they can pass judgement on ppl "oh there condition isn't that bad" or "there walking today so why cant they work" is starting to drive me spare!
I only go by the figures that speak for themselves. The failure rate of ESA claimants for one.

Ok from the Daily mail I guess? how about taking a more balance approach & look at the amount of ppl that are re awarded ESA on appeal? from what I have read it ranges between 40 - 60% depending on source.

Ppl c the worse cases on the news & the media of ppl that claim benefit fraudulently. Ppl use to be sensible enough to understand that this is the media they will put up the story's that r going to sell those papers, get abit of hate going around. Two that spring to mind is a girl that said her dad is a lazy scrounger and has everything including a 50inc plasma tv and the other saying she pays for boob jobs on her benefit.

I'd love to know what benefit this was!
If the facts aren't there for the media to report on - then I would agree. However the media choose to show cases, it is still the case that these stories are true!
What Benefits?
As an example: my daughter came home yesterday with my new grand daughter. In a bag she had leaflets given to her to read. Some were very informative - feeding etc. There was one that explained in great detail everything that a family/single mother could claim for. Even right down to travelling expenses paid up front to visit the baby in hospital. Then there is the money given to feed visitors in the restaurant if the mum is on benefits.
You would not believe what a child would give you in benefits! I was shocked! Multiply that by say 4 children and then even I can understand how people get those levels of benefit! It's disgusting!!

Yes & that's not a disability benefit is it? ppl seem to be getting confused with the mothers who have as many children as possible, to squeeze as much money as possible & disabled ppl. U cant tar everyone with the same brush. Just as with these career benefit moms there r moms that are very genuine just the same as with disabled ppl. To be honest this is what I see to be the bigger problem but its not for me to decide.

The media don't want to know about the girl who came out of care, got through her education and then got crippled by her disabilty and even though its happened is still trying to get somewhere.

Cos reality is alot different. The saying " before you pass judgement walk a day in my shoes" springs to mind. I don't see why I should justify myself to any body and I encourage other genuine disabled ppl to do the same. The only person I need to justify myself to is me and the DWP. The ppl that are claiming fraudulently will get found out in the end.

Also in my case why should I be made to feel like something of someones shoe because I have a hereditary condition that I have absolute no control over and everything I do have control over I've improved and its still enough?

Also ppl that blatantly come out and basically say disabled ppl should have the 'basics' given to them and that's it. In mind the only reason for this is ppl who are fortunate to be healthy and working want to be able to look down on the disabled. Plain and simple.
Not at all. What gets up people's noses, including mine, is the level of benefits paid out that is able to buy expensive household items.
I look at it that I can only afford to buy the basic things, why then should someone on benefits be able to buy the more expensive version?

Well last time I checked you where on benefits.So are you saying that long term disabled ppl should have no right other than live in poverty because they have a disability that more often than not wasn't there fault? so what would be expectable in your grand opinion?

Oldestrocker - you seem have very double standard's in your esa post you clearly state "As such I was also going to ask that I should not be retested again, but if that wasn't possible, then no tests for at least 3 years min."

Your clearly trying to tell the DWP what they should do, they don't work like that if they feel like you need to be assessed you need to be and if not you could lose your benefit. But then your saying ppl should be tested more on DLA seems abit double standard.
I'll try and put it as simply as I can. The Tribunal can and does over ride the ATOS/DWP decision as to when somebody should be re-tested. This is based on independent medical evidence. If the evidence shows that re-testing is not needed for say 3 years, the Tribunal will instruct the DWP to do that and not three months that the DWP decided before hand.
As regards DLA, at the moment very few claimants actually are tested by ATOS. The DWP rely generally on a GP's report. The DLA decision can last for years without any more testing taking place. What I consider appropriate is more regular testing depending on the medical evidence supplied. Too many claimants never tell the DWP/DLA when they have an improvement in their health and carry on getting the benefit. However they are quick enough to tell them if they get any worse!! Too much is placed on the claimant to be honest enough to say that they don't need the level of DLA they are getting.
In addition, a GP's report is open to abuse. It is a well known fact that GP's can be swayed by the patient when deciding what to include in the report.

You kind of proved my point in that u still wouldn't be able to dictate weither or not u where tested or not. It doesn't matter if its the DWP or the tribunal its not your decision and rightly so.

Also if you didn't have your private pensions would you claim DLA?
No I wouldn't. DLA is not a top up of income! It is money given to provide for needs. However, this should change. It should be for needs THAT ARE NOT ALREADY BEING PROVIDED FOR. Too many people, and I know many, that see DLA as another bit of money coming in to up the pot each month to live on.
DLA should only be paid out for the most serious of cases, provable by evidence, tested regulary like ESA, and maybe quantified by Social Services.
I'm not in that league, so why would I apply for an increase in DLA? Errr maybe cos I want a holiday this year - maybe a cruise!

Well by the brief announcement on the other thread its not surprising as it seems u have roughly the money that someone disabled would have anyway. I bet u would rapidly change your tune if it wasn't the case
In my opinion yes there are fraudulent claimants and everyone should be found out. My worry is the government is more interested in getting as many off as possible regardless of the consequence.

By all means test but make it fair.

You have extremely double standards that everyone should follow the right procedure but some how you should be exempt. I feel sorry for you that you have " had over 40 years of experience destroying other people's lives - do you wish me to start on you? "

I find that extremely disturbing and I would be seeking help if I where you and it wouldn't make me feel very proud or righteous.

I imagine your one of these ppl that grumble about everything and feel free to stay in that world of misery but don't pull me into it

GlasweJen

Oh so now you pull the race card, not everyone dies of an overdose you know and since you appear to have jesus-like properties we'll only have a few days respite anyway if you did.

Oh and they're not dresses, they're skirts.

oldestrocker

Two4Tuesday wrote: »

Well you have admitted to having MH problems severe enough to warrant needing supervision/guidance out of doors (hence your claim and award of Low Rate DLA Mobility). Given your earlier comments, it seems rather hypocritical for you to claim DLA even if you are entitled to it.
Why? For the MH aspect I know that I am entitled to LRM. I would be more than happy to be re-tested every 6 months because I know I will pass. As regards the Care component, yes I have been told to claim it and I would have backing from my GP/Consultant, but to be honest I can cope with my problems, so don't see the need to claim it. Between my wife and I we manage, not brilliantly, but we do. Then I question what would the extra money mean to us - nothing because we cope now as it is - so there is nothing more that we need.
I don't see DLA as a cash cow as others do. I have no extra needs so no, what is the point - it seems dishonest if I did claim.
What I have been going on about is that some people see DLA as another form of income, instead of looking at it as possible payment for needs that are not currently met out of income. If the needs are met either fianncially out of income or care provided by family and friends, there is no need for extra money as there are no additional needs to be met.


You have also mentioned your self medication of morphine sulphate on the CAG forum - very like our old Andy
Whether the guy you mention is on similar medication to me I have no idea and quite honestly don't care. If you wish to think otherwise then that is up to you.
Yes I take Morphine for pain control along with Tramadol. I don't and have never touched alcohol - oh I tell a lie - I do enjoy the occassional chocolate liqueur at Christmas.
1000's of people take Morphine for pain control - does that mean that I am some sort of raving lunatic as others seem to think I am?

And while you are on here, Yes I am on the assessment rate, and yes they did agree with me that there was no hard evidence for the work group.
What I have to consider now bearing in mind the Tribunal will not come around until late 2011, do I want to carry on with my claim. It is getting too much, and I am seriously considering to close it altogether. I have just sent off another 6 month MED3 today after speaking with my GP this morning.

I just hope that that explains things a little better

davsidipp

i didnt think you could mix tramadol with morphine chemist told my husband not to take the 2 together very lethal.

GlasweJen

It can be done but it's usually very short term post-operatively for extreme pain relating to said op.

davsidipp

thanks husband has been on morphine patches for 4 months now and took tramadol before but when pain gets worse is tempted to take a tramadol but knows its a no no is on a lot of other drugs as well so needs to be careful.

sunnyone

davsidipp wrote: »

thanks husband has been on morphine patches for 4 months now and took tramadol before but when pain gets worse is tempted to take a tramadol but knows its a no no is on a lot of other drugs as well so needs to be careful.

Im on fentynl, tramadol and oramorph and I have been for years, its perfectly safe but they like to frighten people.

davsidipp

thanks husband was in extreme pain the other night so tempted but chemist was adamant and not knowing a great deal about some drugs i made sure he didnt take one .

GlasweJen

Depends on the strength of the tramadol, when the chemist makes up a prescription it will highlight any interactions with previous items and will print out a warning slip for the pharmacist to look at and make a judgement on. Most of the time they just "suppress" the information but sometimes it's important to let the patient know when the drugs are likely to interact. You should talk to the doctor before taking tramadol and morphine together.