MSE News: Half a million could lose disability benefits

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

You could perfectly well supply transport in the form of special taxi services, Dial a Ride buses and specific utility tariffs for the disabled. You could extend the latter to the elderly and withdraw the WFA.

(Can't you introduce your daughter to internet shopping for groceries and etc.?)

She already uses dial a bus once a week. Because it's a disabled complex, it gets filled up very easily.

And no her food shopping she likes to get out and do it. It's a once a week thing. I take her and she uses the scooter to get round. If you've ever used those wheelchair trolleys, you'll know why :wall: Thought I was hooking it up wrong until I asked someone else :rotfl:

She already does buy a lot online. But in all honesty, her taxis are used to get her out of the house. It's given her a new lease of life since being awarded her DLA to be able to do this. She's much less isolated on the whole. The isolation before being awarded this was tremendous, and added to the depression that she also suffered from. It's not the be all and end all, but I would say that the depression has eased a bit now that she's able to get out and about without having to rely on me. This at least gives her a bit of independence. Isn't that what it's meant to do?

There's no special taxi services in this area. There used to be, but when I asked about them, the OT looked at me as if I had 2 heads, but I do remember using them with a client in the same county when I worked in this field. Think you could get a taxi into town for about 50p or something like that.

There's no discount on utilities afaik. However, I believe her ISP has got her marked as being disabled, so if her phone or internet goes down she becomes a priority (or was this her old ISP, sorry brain fog today)

But the getting out and about is the biggest thing for her. As I'm sure most of you can understand, it's not nice for a young lass to be sat staring at 4 walls all day every day And I'm grateful she gets it, cos she was unbearable without it.

Dunroamin

nannytone wrote: »

i dont use internet shopping as it takes me 10 times as long as visitng the supermarket!
but something as simple as visitng the shops can be the only social interaction some disabled people het.
having the money instead of the 'service' gives disabled people choice.
we have a mini bus scheme where i live. but economics dictae that it should be run at capacity.
so a trip to the nearest tesco ( which takes 15 minutes to drive to) takes upto 1 and 1/2 hours each way by the time it has picked up and dropped off.
i said it is nice to go and do your own shopping... but it isnt my choice for a day trip!

I don't think most of us consider going shopping as a social interaction but sitting on a bus for a couple of hours probably is, particularly when you've nothing else to do all day.

nannytone_2

you are so patronising.
i have FAR better things to do than sit on a mini bus for 3 hours in order to pick up some groceries!
many disabled people like to do 'normal' things as much as possible.
just because we have disabilities doesnt make us a different species!

dori2o

Dunroamin wrote: »

Could I just point out that actually it was dorio's idea - I was just agreeing with it and taking it a bit further.

I would much prefer the services, but that is just me, as I know how much these services cost and it is much more than I am provided in benefits, which is one reason that solution will never happen. I would cost the government lots more than what they currently pay out now in benfit claims.

However I do also use the money I get to help fund additional transport costs. I don't have a choice but to go to work in the car. My employer will not agree to home working and I cannot sit on public transport for an hour+ at a time

Ideally there should be a balance. Improved services but still providing assistance for additional costs.

When PIP comes in there is a possibility I, along with many other, will be told we are not disabled enough for help from the state, at that point I have 2 options. 1) apply for help via access to work and get a 'paid for' taxi (paid for by the state) to take me from home to work and back again, or 2) give up this job and get another closer to home.

The problem with option 2 is I have to stay in the civil service. With my sickness record and the necessary adjustments I have it will be almost impossible to get a job in the private sector. Who will want to employ someone who needs regular toime off for appointments, has averaged 3 months+ a year sickness over the past 6 years, cannot guarantee being in on time everyday due to their condition and medications?

The problem for many disabled people isn't working, its being able to manage their condition around their job, it's being able to get to their place of work in the first place, it's maintaining that job and hoping to god an employer will give allowances for time off etc.

The current system needs improving, but not to the extent that we go 10% in the opposite direction. There needs to be a balance and until that happens nobody is going to be happy with what we have.

mazza111

Dunroamin wrote: »

I don't think most of us consider going shopping as a social interaction but sitting on a bus for a couple of hours probably is, particularly when you've nothing else to do all day.

Hmmm I have to agree with nannytone on that one.. Having nothing to do all day? Really? Takes twice the time to shower, twice to time to do a wee bit of housework, twice the time to get dinner from microding to table.

I can only go on my dd's case and my old mam's case. But for the dd shopping certainly is a social interaction for her. There's days she could just not bother and say f.. it and order in. But I've told her, I go to supermarket one day a week, she either finds the drive to go or not...Don't get me wrong, now she's getting her DLA she can go visit her friends. Who are few and far between these days, and I can't blame them for falling away in all honesty.They would invite her out, she'd spend all day getting herself ready to go, then the fatigue would hit and she would be too knacked to go anywhere. But that can be one of the joys of being disabled eh?

Although I do have to admit, thing have got a bit easier for me now that we're not going to the hospital 3 times a week Now it's time for me to get my own health a bit better.

princessdon

I get where DR is coming from. I say this with a tin hat as I know it will sound selfish but it's true.

My gran used to treat food shopping like a social event (and still does at times, but less so). I'd ring and say I'm off to Mr T's do you need anything and when she said "Oh I'd love to come", my heart at times would drop. I knew that what was a 30 min quick shop would now take 3 hours plus.

I'm not talking about the extra time to get her there but how long she'd take round the shop. She would talk to anyone, ask them if they had tried X or Y, what it was like, anyone who'd listen etc.

I do a sympathetic smile to those behind me at the checkouts, because she would want the operators life history ya da ya da.

It's less so now that she is in her new home as she is often too busy so will say "grab me milk" as I am doing Tai Chi, or bridge etc, but when she had less chance to do things it was a social outing.

She also used to ask me to leave the car and take the bus, or push her chair, stopping everyone as partly needed adult company but also to prolong the "day out".

Given how many disabled I see (there is man who struggles with walking yet I see at 7am every morning going for his paper), he also stops you for a 10 min or so chat, longer if I have time. I think he times his walk to meet me when I am on my way out and fuss over the kids.

For some it can be an social experience that whiles down time, not for all, but for some.

princessdon

dori2o wrote: »

I would much prefer the services, but that is just me, as I know how much these services cost and it is much more than I am provided in benefits, which is one reason that solution will never happen. I would cost the government lots more than what they currently pay out now in benfit claims.

However I do also use the money I get to help fund additional transport costs. I don't have a choice but to go to work in the car. My employer will not agree to home working and I cannot sit on public transport for an hour+ at a time

Ideally there should be a balance. Improved services but still providing assistance for additional costs.

When PIP comes in there is a possibility I, along with many other, will be told we are not disabled enough for help from the state, at that point I have 2 options. 1) apply for help via access to work and get a 'paid for' taxi (paid for by the state) to take me from home to work and back again, or 2) give up this job and get another closer to home.

The problem with option 2 is I have to stay in the civil service. With my sickness record and the necessary adjustments I have it will be almost impossible to get a job in the private sector. Who will want to employ someone who needs regular toime off for appointments, has averaged 3 months+ a year sickness over the past 6 years, cannot guarantee being in on time everyday due to their condition and medications?

The problem for many disabled people isn't working, its being able to manage their condition around their job, it's being able to get to their place of work in the first place, it's maintaining that job and hoping to god an employer will give allowances for time off etc.

The current system needs improving, but not to the extent that we go 10% in the opposite direction. There needs to be a balance and until that happens nobody is going to be happy with what we have.

Not all disabilities need adjustments etc. Mine doesn't (bar a loop for my aid but I have some hearing so can manage), my other is an illness that they accommodate easily, but not all employment would, so I know that for that 1, I'd need a good employer and certain jobs would not be applicable.

My best friend at work has Spina Bifida, she gets DLA but doesn't use any of the money if honest (apart from her mob car). She is married to a handyman (he does my jobs when OH is away), she has her car - which clearly she needs as has low mobility, but she doesn't need DLA. It is a wages top up, she puts it into her grandchild's bank account, it isn't used for anything.

She has no pain (she actually has no feeling below the knee at all), so other than 2 dead legs to drag around that she can't control, she doesn't have any additional expenses.

She has never had a day's sick, never needed any form of special consideration at work, bar a chair and stool for comfort and is highly employable anywhere, as I would be with my sensory impairment. If she was single she'd have to pay for a lot of things (windows, painting, some help around the home), but she is married so no costs

So it's not 1 size fit's all. In the case of the above she claims DLA because of the car. Her OH cannot drive and she needs some adaptions, the money is less important, she even says it compensation money really.

Same with my Gran, she needs the money from her AA to pay for carers, that and more is paid out. However, if I was to give up work and claim CA she would have zero expenses. She may use *some* but very little of this as her needs are met by a physical person to help, there wouldn't be a need to pay anything really. Highly disabled but as needs are met via family/carers then the AA would be compensation and not needed.

It is why I never claimed AA for her despite her being able to qualify for many years as my old job allowed her needs to be met by me. There was no additional expenses, it is only now there are additional expenses of carers I have claimed for her.

I do think it is strange that we often give money via DLA when it isn't actually needed for the disability. I get needing Taxi's for Mazza's daughter (hope you don't mind me using this as an example) but let say she could drive or had a partner who drove and a mobility car then the taxi bill would be far less (maybe zero), yet they both get paid the same. One person using all and more of DLA on transport and the other - well it's spending money. It's this that I find really bizarre about our current system if honest.

clemmatis

princessdon wrote: »

Not all disabilities need adjustments etc. Mine doesn't (bar a loop for my aid but I have some hearing so can manage), my other is an illness that they accommodate easily, but not all employment would, so I know that for that 1, I'd need a good employer and certain jobs would not be applicable.

My best friend at work has Spina Bifida, she gets DLA but doesn't use any of the money if honest (apart from her mob car). She is married to a handyman (he does my jobs when OH is away), she has her car - which clearly she needs as has low mobility, but she doesn't need DLA. It is a wages top up, she puts it into her grandchild's bank account, it isn't used for anything.

She has no pain (she actually has no feeling below the knee at all), so other than 2 dead legs to drag around that she can't control, she doesn't have any additional expenses.

She has never had a day's sick, never needed any form of special consideration at work, bar a chair and stool for comfort and is highly employable anywhere, as I would be with my sensory impairment. If she was single she'd have to pay for a lot of things (windows, painting, some help around the home), but she is married so no costs

So it's not 1 size fit's all. In the case of the above she claims DLA because of the car. Her OH cannot drive and she needs some adaptions, the money is less important, she even says it compensation money really.

Same with my Gran, she needs the money from her AA to pay for carers, that and more is paid out. However, if I was to give up work and claim CA she would have zero expenses. She may use *some* but very little of this as her needs are met by a physical person to help, there wouldn't be a need to pay anything really. Highly disabled but as needs are met via family/carers then the AA would be compensation and not needed.

It is why I never claimed AA for her despite her being able to qualify for many years as my old job allowed her needs to be met by me. There was no additional expenses, it is only now there are additional expenses of carers I have claimed for her.

I do think it is strange that we often give money via DLA when it isn't actually needed for the disability. I get needing Taxi's for Mazza's daughter (hope you don't mind me using this as an example) but let say she could drive or had a partner who drove and a mobility car then the taxi bill would be far less (maybe zero), yet they both get paid the same. One person using all and more of DLA on transport and the other - well it's spending money. It's this that I find really bizarre about our current system if honest.

Of course, the same is true of Attendance Allowance -- as I know you would agree. However neither means testing nor taking into account the ability of a relative/partner to do the caring etc. work seems ideal to me, though (fairly generous).means testing would be one answer. I think we simply have to accept the system is flawed.

princessdon

clemmatis wrote: »

Of course, the same is true of Attendance Allowance -- as I know you would agree. However neither means testing nor taking into account the ability of a relative/partner to do the caring etc. work seems ideal to me, though (fairly generous).means testing would be one answer. I think we simply have to accept the system is flawed.

But does it NEED to be flawed? How easy would it be to pay extra to those that pay more and pay less to those that don't?

if someone's needs are purely care and this is paid via CA why get DLA?

Also why is CA means tested? I'd argue that partners like my friends should be able to claim CA despite working = balanced out by loss of DLA

Dunroamin

nannytone wrote: »

you are so patronising.
i have FAR better things to do than sit on a mini bus for 3 hours in order to pick up some groceries!
many disabled people like to do 'normal' things as much as possible.
just because we have disabilities doesnt make us a different species!

I meant as opposed to someone who has a job!

Anyway, sitting on a mini bus to buy groceries obviously is a normal thing for those who use the service or else it wouldn't be provided, would it? Or do you think it more "normal" to be driven round by someone who's paid to look after you?