MSE News: George Osborne to make £10bn welfare cuts

wattdallas

krisskross wrote: »

Why would they need to be told this ? Why would they not understand simply that your daughter was having hormone treatment for precocious puberty?

I think I understand rather more about medical stuff than you, apart from your obvious in depth knowledge of your daughter's illness. I see huge potential dangers in people describing drugs as something for what they are not intended. What if teens prescribed hormone therapy for menstruation problems are told it is contraception and become pregnant as a result of missing the odd dose as they haven't been given the full information required to use a drug for contraceptive purposes?

Sometimes people are too casual about drug use and terminology. I saw many accidental overdoses because people did not understand the usage of their prescribed medications.[/

Does it really matter what i told them ...NO.

Our consultant explained what this medication is and what its used for.Think hes knows what hes talking about.

Yes you probably do know more than myself about medical stuff ,but in this instance your wrong and our consultants right.

desert_rose

Thing is, according to the news feeds yesterday and today, employment rates are rising and more jobs are being created in the private sector. Granted, most of those jobs appear to be part time ones and national minimum wage too, but - and its a big 'but', more people are finding themselves in work it seems and the national bill for welfare payments is going down.

So, if there's not so many on benefits then the benefit pot deficit should be reduced accordingly. Yet, most of those now in employment will have to claim tax credits if they're to keep their collective heads above water. So, the benefit pot shrinks again, the deficit continues to go up.

Hmmmmm.

Seems that the problem isn't quite what at first it appears to be...

krisskross

wattdallas wrote: »

Our consultant explained what this medication is and what its used for.Think hes knows what hes talking about.

i have no doubt at all that he knows what the medication is used for, I simply wonder why you felt the need to tell anyone that your daughter was being given a contraceptive when the medication wasn't being given for contraceptive purposes.

It would be like my husband saying he is having cancer drugs. He is but not because he needs chemotherapy.

Sixer

krisskross wrote: »

Why would they need to be told this ? Why would they not understand simply that your daughter was having hormone treatment for precocious puberty?

I think I understand rather more about medical stuff than you, apart from your obvious in depth knowledge of your daughter's illness. I see huge potential dangers in people describing drugs as something for what they are not intended. What if teens prescribed hormone therapy for menstruation problems are told it is contraception and become pregnant as a result of missing the odd dose as they haven't been given the full information required to use a drug for contraceptive purposes?

Sometimes people are too casual about drug use and terminology. I saw many accidental overdoses because people did not understand the usage of their prescribed medications.

I think you are just out of touch, frankly. And pursuing a petty point beyond silliness. Many young girls are prescribed oral contraceptive for menstrual problems and even acne. They see it as being "on the pill". So do their parents. So do their doctors. So do their peers. On being prescribed it, they're told why it's being prescribed and also educated on the contraceptive protection it will (in these cases) provide as a side effect.

Your original objection was that a poster should not describe her daughter's medication as a contraceptive if it was not prescribed for contraceptive use. Basically off-topic to the thread as a whole, and many, many people have explained to you that common parlance accepts that the contraceptive pill is prescribed for several reasons, not all contraceptive ones, and that this is understood by most people in the relevant groups (teens, tweens, doctors, parents, family members).

You should just give up with the nitpicking now.

seven-day-weekend

I take a medication called Requip for Restless Leg Syndrome. In higher doses it is used to treat Parkinson's Disease. I don't have Parkinson's and don't take it for that purpose.

I tell pepole that I have RLS and have medication for it. I don't usually tell them it is a Parkinson's drug as well (although occasionally people know it is and then I explain that RLS is nothing to do with Parkinsons).

However, I do know of a few young women who are described as being 'on the pill for her periods'. I personally would not refer to it as a contraceptive under these circumstances, although I suppose it is, the same as Requip is used to treat Parkinsons as well as RLS. But I think it is important to be accurate about your medication and saying it the pill is a contraceptive in these circumstances is not, imho, accurate.

MissMoneypenny

MUMZ2BEE wrote: »

For your information I was born in this country and am white British get that right!!

I wasn't talking to you. I was talking to FBaby, whom it seems is either a French or Spanish citizen?

MissMoneypenny

topaziem wrote: »

And clearly racist!

Again.... some immigrants are the same race as the British. Therefore as MUMZ2BEE hasn't singled out a race, then she hasn't made a racist comment. Different races is primary school education.

MissMoneypenny

FBaby wrote: »

Ha ha, good point...the answer is neither, it is the UK so I understand include Northern Island too!

The UK is split into 4 countries. The country called Scotland, is trying to leave the United Kingdom.

I think you live in the SE of England as (without looking back over your posts) I believe you were talking about the shortage of some NHS services in the SE?

MissMoneypenny

Morlock wrote: »

Her attitude always stinks in my opinion.

As I have said many times on here,:D nobody minds helping the genuine sick or those on a short term job loss; it's those able bodied who choose to live off others, that workers don't like. So it's one of those 'if the cap fits' type statements.

I've loving all the welfare cuts for the able bodied, longterm welfare claimants. :j More please; so that they can never be better off than those who work a full week.

Glen_Clark

MissMoneypenny wrote: »

As I have said many times on here,:D nobody minds helping the genuine sick or those on a short term job loss; it's those able bodied who choose to live off others, that workers don't like. So it's one of those 'if the cap fits' type statements.

I've loving all the welfare cuts for the able bodied, longterm welfare claimants. :j More please; so that they can never be better off than those who work a full week.

Fine in theory, but what of the practice.
Very ill people are being declared able bodied causing great distress to them, and taking up precious Doctors time dealing with ATOS crap when they could be treating the sick..
Even if they do take able bodied people off sickness benefits what then. There are more jobseekers than jobs.. So they go on to a different benefit and have to go on costly courses at the taxpayers expense. These courses might teach them how to fill out a CV, interview technique etc, and get a temporary job, enabling the private contractor running the course to claim a £3,000 bounty from the taxpayer. But there will still be the same number of people out of work because there are more people than jobs.
Its just a gravy train for ATOS and other money grabbing contractors at taxpayers expense.