MSE News: Welfare reforms 'to hit disabled'

System

Interesting reading on the effects the cuts are predicted to have on disabled people:

http://www.mind.org.uk/assets/0002/1425/HH_Tipping_Point_Oct_2012.pdf

cbrown372

topaziem wrote: »

Pensioners??? I know of many pensioners that receive a benefit income that is well above what their needs are.

Many are even now, still able to save out of their benefit monies. Yet they are the 'protected ones'.

The average pensioner couple that have some disabilities, and including HB & CTB, receive in excess of £580 a week!!!

Now tell me that that isn't over the top?

As for those that claim for all manner of disability benefits because they have 'needs' that create an 'entitlement' which have never been and never will be addressed.

It's money for old rope so to speak.

There should be a flat weekly payment that just covers their basic costs of living plus an addition only if they can show that they are actually spending at least that amount on care costs.

Pensioners don't contribute - Ok some may pay a little tax, but on the whole they take more out than they put in. I will ignore VAT etc as that doesn't feature as everyone pays that.

£25,000 + a year in income soley from benefits is disgusting - there is no need for that level of money, much better spent on keeping those that want to work healthy via the NHS!! The Liverpool Pathway gets my vote!

And finally, how many pensioners are sat on assets that they just don't need?
The house for example. Isn't it about time that these assets are quantified and used to reduce the level of benefits? Nothing wrong in telling them to sell up and move into a 1 bed flat (pensioner couple) and having them spend the equity on rent and living costs.

A house worth say £200,000 would provide 15 years to get through before they could go back onto benefits. By which time they would be 80 and more than likely to have 'pegged it'.

I suggest you explain all this in your application for more benefits for your *mother* Andy or is it Paula today?

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/4223655

LunaLady

krisskross wrote: »

Are DLA payments intended to address specific needs or are they simply some sort of financial compensation for being dealt a poor hand health wise?

They cant be intended to address specific areas because those things can change on a monthly basis.

ani_26

xXMessedUpXx wrote: »

Interesting reading on the effects the cuts are predicted to have on disabled people:

http://www.mind.org.uk/assets/0002/1425/HH_Tipping_Point_Oct_2012.pdf

What did i just say? ( and i hadn't seen that.)

If you care, email your MP


Latest

• News
• Mind blog

Tipping point for welfare cuts

Posted: Monday 22 October 2012
A new report has been published today by The Hardest Hit, a coalition of over 90 disability charities and organisations, which highlights the impact of the Government's welfare cuts and reforms on disabled people, including those with mental health problems.
The The Tipping Point (pdf) brings together a survey of over 4,500 disabled people, a poll of more than 350 independent welfare advisers, and more than 50 in-depth interviews with disabled people with varying conditions and impairments.
The report reveals some shocking statistics:

• 8 in 10 disabled people claim losing their Disability Living Allowance (DLA) would drive them into isolation, and would leave them struggling to manage their condition.
• 9 in 10 fear that losing DLA would be detrimental to their health
• More than three-quarters said their health got worse as a result of the stress caused by their Work Capability Assessment (WCA) for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
• Nearly 9 in 10 welfare advisers said the constant reassessments for benefits are damaging people’s health
• 9 in 10 welfare advisers said that too many disabled people are slipping through the net and are left without adequate support by the welfare system.

Mind is encouraging supporters to email their MP and alert them to the report.
Every MP in Parliament needs to read The Tipping Point, to hear about how important these issues are to their constituents, and to support the recommendations made in the report.
Commenting on the report, Mind Chief Executive Paul Farmer said:
It is vital that more people know about the impact of cuts and changes to welfare and benefits on disabled people, including large numbers of people with mental health problems.

This report clearly demonstrates both that the current system is not working fairly and effectively, and that changes that are due to come in soon are likely to make things even worse for disabled people.

I hope that the Government pays close attention to this report and reconsiders the direction of travel they have chosen for welfare and disability.

System

Aye i emailed my MP already.

ani_26

xXMessedUpXx wrote: »

Aye i emailed my MP already.

Consider it done.

JohnRo

topaziem wrote: »

It will instead depend on a professional's opinion.

What "profession" would that be?

FBaby

Muttleythefrog wrote: »

"You can't make a funding decision using tax payers money based on opinions." - that's what ESA, DLA and PIP (will) do. I get ESA because of the opinion of a nurse I've never met.. she bases her opinion on the opinion of a nurse I did once meet. DLA is awarded to me due to opinion of a DWP DM who looked at two peices of evidence... my opinion and my psychiatrist's opinion (which was my opinion that they conveyed..lol).. the DWP DM opinion contradicts mine and my psychiatrist's.

That' fair enough, indeed, currently, the decision is based on the opinion of a health professional, but the alternative being the opinion of the claimant, his family/partner, a carer, or even a benefit supporter is not certainly no better because the decision then takes into account personal and emotional circumstances and that's unlikely to be fair as a whole. It would mean someone with a very supportive family, who gets therefore a knowledgeable right supporter etc... would have more chance to make a case than someone on their own with limited knowledge of the system or ability to express their feelings. When you get the two confronting each other, you rarely reach a reasonable agreement, more a compromise on who shouts the loudest, and that could take a very long time to reach in any case.

On your last point I very very very much doubt it. The cost of actual care is huge... imagine someone getting HRC of DLA.. let's say £80p/w currently. That one person needs care day and night 7 days a week. Let's imagine £10 per hour for a carer (actual rates I understand typically much higher) 7 days a week let's just say 11.5 hours a day (could be double that in reality).. 80 hours a week £800 a week care. This means that an extremely conservative estimate would mean that in order to balance the books for every ten claimants identified as having care needs of HRC by DLA, under your system only 1 would be found to need comparable care with the rest none at all. The actual cost of care makes the idea of a DLA replacement actually providing for actual care needed totally unrealistic unless the overwhelming majority of claimants are getting grossly exaggerated awards. The system would definitely be fairer... lol.. but not on the tax payer.

Again, that's assuming that those on high rate DLA automatically need to pay for a carer. The whole argument is that in many cases, they receive that care without having to pay for it, that is if they actually trully require that care in the first place.

keet83

No doubt that many people with unforseen disabilities, such as epilepsy, will be punished yet again.

FBaby

krisskross wrote: »

Are DLA payments intended to address specific needs or are they simply some sort of financial compensation for being dealt a poor hand health wise?

The award is based on the identified need due to the limitation of the disability, but not the actual financial need required to overcome these limitations. So the factual answer is that it is the latter, but determined on need, because it has to use some kind of scale so not to discriminate against those with more severe disabilities.