MSE News: Half a million could lose disability benefits

zzzLazyDaisy

Dunroamin wrote: »

Anyone can be well enough to work one day and then drop dead the next .

Personally, I think there is something terribly wrong with the benefits system when a person with a terminal diagnosis and prognosis of 6 months or less is fast-tracked through DLA under the special rules in recognition of the fact that their expected life span is extremely limited....

..... but that same person is considered to be fit to work under the ESA rules.

anguk

Boots888 wrote: »

You say your husband is 1 year clear of cancer, why do you then continue to claim AA, - disability benefits. Surely you should stop your claim so that money could go to those more in need of your husband - Isn't that, after all, your own arguement!??????

To be fair I think she has said that her husband suffers from other health complaints, that will probably be why he receives AA. In fact he could have been getting AA before he even got cancer.

For example my husband gets high rate mobility, since he was awarded it he has had a leg amputated, had all the digits on his left hand amputated, his kidneys have failed so he now has dialysis and he's going to get his remaining leg amputated some time in the next few weeks. He doesn't get any extra money because he was already entitled to DLA before all those things happened. I'm guessing the same thing happened with krisskross's husband, he will have been entitled to AA even if he hadn't had cancer.

jamespir

Dunroamin wrote: »

Anyone can be well enough to work one day and then drop dead the next .

yes they can but when someones facing only a few months left then they should be allowed to do that without any worries

krisskross

anguk wrote: »

To be fair I think she has said that her husband suffers from other health complaints, that will probably be why he receives AA. In fact he could have been getting AA before he even got cancer.

Yes he was in receipt of AA before being diagnosed with cancer.

Boots888

krisskross wrote: »

Yes he was in receipt of AA before being diagnosed with cancer.

Ok, I'm now informed & I'm sorry if I offended you earlier.

Still don't understand your stance against those that need the benefit should be denied it.

But I'll take it that I misunderstood you again, just to make it easier for me and to not argue the toss, as I'm having such a lovely day.:D

Boots888

anguk wrote: »

To be fair I think she has said that her husband suffers from other health complaints, that will probably be why he receives AA. In fact he could have been getting AA before he even got cancer.

For example my husband gets high rate mobility, since he was awarded it he has had a leg amputated, had all the digits on his left hand amputated, his kidneys have failed so he now has dialysis and he's going to get his remaining leg amputated some time in the next few weeks. He doesn't get any extra money because he was already entitled to DLA before all those things happened. I'm guessing the same thing happened with krisskross's husband, he will have been entitled to AA even if he hadn't had cancer.

Wow - that's some serious problems you have to cope with there. Hope you're in reciept of the highest components of DLA and get all the support you need.

I also hope any changes our Dave decides to make to benefits for the disabled won't affect you.

clemmatis

Dunroamin wrote: »

Anyone can be well enough to work one day and then drop dead the next .

True. But you'd think even an ATOS assessor could work out that someone with terminal cancer or (serious) heart disease was more likely to die in a matter of weeks, and less likely to be able to work, than, say, Joey Barton.

But anyway this is relevant to ESA, not to DLA.

bigadaj

I think it's pretty unlikely you'd find joey Barton working, utter scum.

One thing that came out of my experience was this blanket term of cancer is utterly meaningless; the prognosis can be anything from minor treatment and a normal life expectancy to a debilitating range of treatments and still a shortened life expectancy.

The fact that you have an illness shouldn't immediately be an excuse for making a claim, the uk obsession with entitlement is depressing and the welfare state should be there'd as a limited safety net, not an excuse to screw an extra few grand out of the system.

Boots888

bigadaj wrote: »

I think it's pretty unlikely you'd find joey Barton working, utter scum.

One thing that came out of my experience was this blanket term of cancer is utterly meaningless; the prognosis can be anything from minor treatment and a normal life expectancy to a debilitating range of treatments and still a shortened life expectancy.

The fact that you have an illness shouldn't immediately be an excuse for making a claim, the uk obsession with entitlement is depressing and the welfare state should be there'd as a limited safety net, not an excuse to screw an extra few grand out of the system.

Yes the Uk has an obsession with entitlement right across the board. But those who are too ill to work fall into a very small bracket of that sense of entitlement and yet are currently being targeted more than any other group.

FBaby

cit_k wrote: »

I guess I hit a nerve, and rather than taking it on board, you respond by trying to falsely attack and undermine the messenger - a rather old, childish tactic.

If you think someone like you can hit a nerve with me you are seriously deluding yourself! I have no interest whatsoever in entering in a discussion with you because I don't think you understand the concept of constructive debate. There are many interventions I have appreciated reading here even when I didn't agree with the content but none of these have been yours.