Dla to be replaced by pip

GlasweJen

There is only 1 charity for my condition in the UK, it doesn't offer any care or mobility support, it offers leaflets to give to your doctor and information on getting anaesthetics. Once you're diagnosed there's a message board you can use but it's full of people talking about medications, coping with raising kids, the genetic testing etc. That wont help me have a bath without killing myself so why should they get my care money?

Doom_and_Gloom

oldestrocker wrote: »

Don't be ridiculous - I never said that.

The point of the thread was that money given for DLA should be shown to be used for the purpose it was given ie Care or Mobility.

Actually that wasn't the point of the thread. It was to state that they are replacing DLA with a new benefit called PIP.

oldestrocker wrote: »

Being married, I have a full time carer already which doesn't cost me a penny. So why would married claimants need money to pay for care - quite simple!

My partner works and is also my carer. He can only work part time due to looking after me meaning the money he can earn is reduced and let me tell you something it is reduced a hell of a lot more than the care component I receive. If my partner could work the hours he does as well as all the hours he cares for me we wouldn't have to worry about money as he'd be working 60+ hour weeks which even on just over minimum wage would be rather a lot, instead he works part time. He saves the government a hell of a lot of money by being my carer and working - he earns slightly too much to be able to claim carers allowence and it also means the governemnt don't have to send someone out to look after me at the cost of £200+ easy a week.
We do use some of the care component money in a kind of respite way, I go to an adult education centre 2 hours a week (it was cheaper than 2 hours of actual respite care but I still have someone keeping an eye on me!), so that my partner can get a break from looking after me. I also have a friend come over once a week and pay for her bus ticket to get here and back which also helps me. It's very draining for carers to do what they do.

oldestrocker wrote: »

I don't need taxis because I am married and my wife takes me where ever I need to go - so why do married claimants need financial help for mobility?

My partner doesn't drive a car he has a motorbike and I can't get on that. We can't afford for him to take driving lessons for a car and even if we could I doubt he would find the time. This leaves my partner and I using public transport or getting taxis when we go out together. Sometimes we get a lift by my parents but this is a rare thing and is usually because of a big shop.

oldestrocker wrote: »

If I was entitled to HRM, what would I need the money for? I don't need a car, my wife has one. She can't drive two cars!

As above!

oldestrocker wrote: »

What I am saying is that the whole idea of DLA needs rethinking about.
It should be based on need and requirement THAT is already not being provided for by family, friends or otherwise.
Looking at that I can see quite a few charities that could fill that gap without the money going to the claimant but direct to the charities instead.

So people should be expected to look after people for FA aswell as have the chance to work taken away from them completely or limited? That is really harsh. In a way my partner is doing the caring for sweet FA, as he doesn't get carers allowence, but as I get the care component it means he can have some of that money and it also means we can pay for an activity and a bus ticket for a friend to look after me that gives my partner a break. Do you think disabled people enjoy being a burden on their partners/friends/family?

By the way it is much cheaper to give the payments direct to the claiment. By giving it to charities or simular you will have to pay for much more than the care needs out of that money. There will also be the case where they will define what a care need is and it won't cover all kinds of care needs. The person won't get the care needs and they also won't have the money to do so themselves leaving them stuck. Well done, great idea there!

It's like giving the NHS money to help people get aids. If they don't meet all the criteria the person won't get the aid on the NHS but they still need it. That's how I ended up buying my own wheelchair as part time users don't quilify for them on the NHS. I use crutches when I am able but for long distances or when I am really bad I can't and rely on my wheelchair. If I didn't get my mobility component I would not have got the wheelchair from the NHS and we would not have been able to afford it, even hiring one would not be possible without the mobility component. I would be stuck inside a lot without my wheelchair. How does that help?

GlasweJen

Isn't it funny how in one breath oldestrockers wife can't make it to the toilet on her own and can't hold her balance in her own house and yet in another she provides care equal to middle care, low mobility DLA?

Indie_Kid

oldestrocker wrote: »

The point of the thread was that money given for DLA should be shown to be used for the purpose it was given ie Care or Mobility.

Being married, I have a full time carer already which doesn't cost me a penny. So why would married claimants need money to pay for care - quite simple!

Are you married with a young child or two? If the partner didn't work, how would they for the mortgage? The partner (and the disabled person) need respite and for some people, working does help them a lot. If I was to get married, I would still have extra costs of wheat free food, replacing things that I break, extra water, etc.

I don't need taxis because I am married and my wife takes me where ever I need to go - so why do married claimants need financial help for mobility?

I used to know someone who has severe hypermobility and used a wheelchair to get around. Her fiancee is deafblind. How on earth do you suggest that they both get around?

Looking at that I can see quite a few charities that could fill that gap without the money going to the claimant but direct to the charities instead.

And this will help some of us how? I need new glasses every 8-12 months - the lenses alone are £49. How do you suggest that I pay for these (no DLA, no disability premiums - JSA is £51.85 for someone under 25) on £51.85 a week? Can't get them on the NHS, because they're a "luxury".

oldestrocker

GlasweJen wrote: »

There is only 1 charity for my condition in the UK, it doesn't offer any care or mobility support, it offers leaflets to give to your doctor and information on getting anaesthetics. Once you're diagnosed there's a message board you can use but it's full of people talking about medications, coping with raising kids, the genetic testing etc. That wont help me have a bath without killing myself so why should they get my care money?

There might only be one charity that deals with your illness, but there are at least three that I know of that could expand their services with government money to provide care in the community as well as provide help for mobility.

oldestrocker

Doom_and_Gloom wrote: »

Actually that wasn't the point of the thread. It was to state that they are replacing DLA with a new benefit called PIP.
Yes and it will give the government chance to look at the whole DLA scenario. Could money be better used elsewhere to provide care and help with mobility. Sift out those that are claiming it illegally that the government currently don't know of.

My partner works and is also my carer. He can only work part time due to looking after me meaning the money he can earn is reduced and let me tell you something it is reduced a hell of a lot more than the care component I receive. If my partner could work the hours he does as well as all the hours he cares for me we wouldn't have to worry about money as he'd be working 60+ hour weeks which even on just over minimum wage would be rather a lot, instead he works part time. He saves the government a hell of a lot of money by being my carer and working - he earns slightly too much to be able to claim carers allowence and it also means the governemnt don't have to send someone out to look after me at the cost of £200+ easy a week.
We do use some of the care component money in a kind of respite way, I go to an adult education centre 2 hours a week (it was cheaper than 2 hours of actual respite care but I still have someone keeping an eye on me!), so that my partner can get a break from looking after me. I also have a friend come over once a week and pay for her bus ticket to get here and back which also helps me. It's very draining for carers to do what they do.
As I have said earlier, charities could do the same in the community for a fraction of the current level of DLA financial cost.
Your partner could then go back to work.

My partner doesn't drive a car he has a motorbike and I can't get on that. We can't afford for him to take driving lessons for a car and even if we could I doubt he would find the time. This leaves my partner and I using public transport or getting taxis when we go out together. Sometimes we get a lift by my parents but this is a rare thing and is usually because of a big shop.
Again money given to charities could provide all of the help you need at a fraction of the current cost of DLA payments.
As above!

So people should be expected to look after people for FA aswell as have the chance to work taken away from them completely or limited? That is really harsh. In a way my partner is doing the caring for sweet FA, as he doesn't get carers allowence, but as I get the care component it means he can have some of that money and it also means we can pay for an activity and a bus ticket for a friend to look after me that gives my partner a break. Do you think disabled people enjoy being a burden on their partners/friends/family?
That is what friends and family are for. To help others that are in need. They in turn might need help in their later life. You only have to look at the European continent to see what families do for each other AND don't expect to be paid for it. It's called, love, sharing and social responsibility.

By the way it is much cheaper to give the payments direct to the claiment. By giving it to charities or simular you will have to pay for much more than the care needs out of that money. There will also be the case where they will define what a care need is and it won't cover all kinds of care needs. The person won't get the care needs and they also won't have the money to do so themselves leaving them stuck. Well done, great idea there!
You would be assessed by professionals who will know what help you need.

It's like giving the NHS money to help people get aids. If they don't meet all the criteria the person won't get the aid on the NHS but they still need it. That's how I ended up buying my own wheelchair as part time users don't quilify for them on the NHS. I use crutches when I am able but for long disances or when I am really bad I can't and rely on my wheelchair. If I didn't get my mobility component I would not have got the wheelchair from the NHS and we would not have been able to afford it, even hiring one would not be possible without the mobility component. I would be stuck inside a lot without my wheelchair. How does that help?
If you are assessed as not needing the help, then it is a personal choice if you wish to provide it and pay for it.
The same goes for these new drugs - if there are substitutes that are as good, that those will be provided FOC, your choice if you wish to go private - not the UK taxpayer.

You don't seem to see the bigger picture - you seem to be stuck on what has always happened, will and should continue to happen. Things change and we must change with them!

oldestrocker

GlasweJen wrote: »

Isn't it funny how in one breath oldestrockers wife can't make it to the toilet on her own and can't hold her balance in her own house and yet in another she provides care equal to middle care, low mobility DLA?

Who said anything about MRC? I didn't. I don't even look at it that way. OK she has bad legs - many do, I have a MH problem, many do - money won't change it!

Between us we manage - what I was saying is that no amount of extra money will make any difference to our way of life.

My wife has artritis of both hips and knees, but that doesn't stop her cooking, cleaning or driving. If however she is having a bad day, then someone else in the family comes along. We do and have done the same for them in the past - just returning it!

Doom_and_Gloom

oldestrocker wrote: »

Yes and it will give the government chance to look at the whole DLA scenario. Could money be better used elsewhere to provide care and help with mobility. Sift out those that are claiming it illegally that the government currently don't know of.

Why do people honestly believe this is the government trying to weed out the fraudsters, which yes there are some but they are few and far between. The reason the government are doing this is because they want to get as many people off DLA as possible as it bring premiums on other benefits if people claim them. All this is is a money saving exersize that isn't going to work. People who use their DLA currently to work may get it taken away leaving them with no way to continue working. KNow what happens then? They have to give up work as they can't mange to work anymore without the help!

oldestrocker wrote: »

As I have said earlier, charities could do the same in the community for a fraction of the current level of DLA financial cost.
Your partner could then go back to work.

How would he be able to work full time instead of the part time he does now? Note my partner does work, he works part time so it wouldn't be a case of going back to work but gaining more hours! Do you not see he is working when he cares for me? Do you not think he should get something for doing so? Do you have any idea how many carers there are that get sweet FA because of the current system? Do you have any idea how much carers cost? No I doubt you do. They cost £200+ easy a week (they get a bit more than minimum wage but let us say £6/hour. 6X35 (as 35 is the minimum for MRC) = £210/week and that is MINUMUM. That is not cheaper than the current DLAfor care as MRC is £47.80 per week and HRC is £71.40 per week. Even if a partner/friend/family member was getting carers allowence of £53.90/week on HRC that would only get you up to £125.3 or £101.70 if on MRC. As you can see it is not cheaper at all. So how would it cost a fraction of the costs exactly?

oldestrocker wrote: »

Again money given to charities could provide all of the help you need at a fraction of the current cost of DLA payments.

No it would cost a lot more due to runing costs, distribution costs, budgeting management, the need to get the equipment and a place to store it. That they would be having to pay out for every little thing the person needed help with because the person can't afford to buy anything to help themselves. It's also very demeaning to have your independence taken away from you which is what this kind of system does. DLA was a means for the disabled to stay as independent as possible. What you suggest would be going back a step and wouldn't be helping anyone. Disabled people have the right to stay as independent as possible - disabled people are human after all.

oldestrocker wrote: »

That is what friends and family are for. To help others that are in need. They in turn might need help in their later life. You only have to look at the European continent to see what families do for each other AND don't expect to be paid for it. It's called, love, sharing and social responsibility.

They have these little things called life and work. They can't be coming to my call whenever I need them when they have other things to be doing.

oldestrocker wrote: »

You would be assessed by professionals who will know what help you need.

They won't have enough money. It's not economically viable to do it the way you state. That was my point about the wheelchair - I need it for going out unless it is a very small distance but can manage on my crutches inside. Any place that runs these kinds of help do so with a strict criteria so it's no help really. It only helps a select few and that isn't what it should do at all. Anyone that needs the help should get it but that won't be how it works.

oldestrocker wrote: »

If you are assessed as not needing the help, then it is a personal choice if you wish to provide it and pay for it.

oldestrocker wrote: »

The same goes for these new drugs - if there are substitutes that are as good, that those will be provided FOC, your choice if you wish to go private - not the UK taxpayer.

It was not a personal choice to buy the wheelchair. It was a need which you don't seem to understand. I can barely even make it to the corner shop most of the time on my crutches, and sometimes I can not, which is not very far at all but I didn't quilify - the .
By the way you have me confused with another poster as I don't take drugs for my condition. Even my GP says it won't really help to use medication because although I won't feel the pain etc I won't be able to use my legs at all and I won't be able to concentrate - I wouldn't be safe using my wheelchair on my own at all just to put it into perspective for you.

oldestrocker wrote: »

You don't seem to see the bigger picture - you seem to be stuck on what has always happened, will and should continue to happen. Things change and we must change with them!

You can't see the bigger picture. You are blind sighted by what you think is wrong that you can't see the wrong in what you think would be the right way. You don't realise it wouldn't be cheaper, it won't help the way you think it would etc. Yes change does need to happen but it needs to be thought through and not rushed. They need to make sure that the plans will be able to really help. I don't think it would and I see a lot of people being issolated by this to be honest.

Indie_Kid

oldestrocker wrote: »

Who said anything about MRC? I didn't. I don't even look at it that way. OK she has bad legs - many do, I have a MH problem, many do - money won't change it!

You're right, money doesn't change it. However, DLA means I can go swimming - this means that I am in less pain. DLA means I can buy wet wipes - because if I use tissue to wipe myself after going toilet, my skin can and does bleed.

For some, DLA does change things. There are some people who have a car on the motability scheme - because this is the cheapest way they can get an adapted car.

Between us we manage - what I was saying is that no amount of extra money will make any difference to our way of life.

To yours maybe it doesn't; to others it does.

If however she is having a bad day, then someone else in the family comes along. We do and have done the same for them in the past - just returning it!

You're lucky then. When I lived in London, I lived at least 5 miles from the closest relative. Now, there is no way she could just see me when I was in need of help - because she works.

hrafndot

oldestrocker wrote: »

It's quite simple really - just be truthful and honest in your answers!
Write it as it is. There is no need to ask for 'professional form fillers' - there are no magic words or phrases - just the truth!

I become angry when patronised by someone who is spouting political dogma but has little factual understanding. My appeal judge clearly thought I was being honest and truthful.

I went through ESA initially like a lamb to the slaughter and went through 2 years of hell. I simply advise other people not to do similarly and get good advice from a person who understands the process.

Some of the "professionhal form fillers" exist because people have difficulty holding a pen or are impossibly intimidated by the form(s).