I accept benefits on behalf of my son. If he indicates he wants to go out to eat, if I use some of his money, does he still have no damned right to be in a restaurant? After all, he made the choice and has money.
Benefits aren't paid so you can eat out in restaurants. You clearly receive more than you should if you can do that. I recommend you contact the benefits office and negotiate a repayment plan.
No, i think they have no rights because they are children. Obviously that doesn't mean they can be abused but i think the Victorians were right. Certainly, outside the home - they should be seen and not heard.
Like it or lump it.
You have an irrational dislike of children. I remember your posts on the subject of parent and child spaces from my previous stint here. You are quite extreme in your views. Very strange behaviour indeed.
Good on you, makes you feel you're doing a decent job bring up your child doesn't it?
And as another person, it is lovely to see. A child bumped into me in to me in Asda and it was an accident, the mum could have done nothing to stop him but she made the boy stop and apologise to me. I just thought it was wonderful to see manners being taught. She will probably see her boy grow into a redpectable young man
You have an irrational dislike of children. I remember your posts on the subject of parent and child spaces from my previous stint here. You are quite extreme in your views. Very strange behaviour indeed.
Is there an underlying reason?
Yes, i don't like the hassle caused by other peoples badly behaved children.
It is unnecessary and usually a product of both poor parenting an an arrogance that indicates that because they're children they can do whatever they like with impunity.
I don't agree (clearly) or accept either - My day to day actions do not adversely impact upon anyone - i don't find it acceptable that bad and/or arrogant parents can negatively impact my life and not be told what a bunch of shitbags they are.
Benefits aren't paid so you can eat out in restaurants. You clearly receive more than you should if you can do that. I recommend you contact the benefits office and negotiate a repayment plan.
I'm NOT joking.
What should a disabled child spend their LIVING allowance on then?
What should a disabled child spend their LIVING allowance on then?
Being supported to do the things their disability preculdes them from. Benefits are not there to pay for treats or entertainment - that is YOUR responsibility.
Benefits are not pocket money. If you have enough to treat it as such then you clearly are recieving too much.
No, i think they have no rights because they are children. Obviously that doesn't mean they can be abused but i think the Victorians were right. Certainly, outside the home - they should be seen and not heard.
Like it or lump it.
Perhaps you think children shouldn't be anywhere but the blacking factory, or down the mine, or picking oakum at the workhouse?
Any other Victorian things you would like to see reintroduced?
Being supported to do the things their disability preculdes them from. Benefits are not there to pay for treats or entertainment - that is YOUR responsibility.
Benefits are not pocket money. If you have enough to treat it as such then you clearly are recieving too much.
Yes, i don't like the hassle caused by other peoples badly behaved children.
It is unnecessary and usually a product of both poor parenting an an arrogance that indicates that because they're children they can do whatever they like with impunity.
I don't agree (clearly) or accept either - My day to day actions do not adversely impact upon anyone - i don't find it acceptable that bad and/or arrogant parents can negatively impact my life and not be told what a bunch of shitbags they are.
Being supported to do the things their disability preculdes them from. Benefits are not there to pay for treats or entertainment - that is YOUR responsibility.
Benefits are not pocket money. If you have enough to treat it as such then you clearly are recieving too much.
needs - This is help that is reasonably needed, not what is given, nor what is medically essential. This is help to lead as normal a life as possible. This includes help you need outside your home. For example you can be given help to do your own shopping or to take part in "reasonable" social activities.
I make my annoyance known if children are causing a pain in restaurants. No one can say i don't understand as i have a 6 year old of my own. If i am in a restaurant with her and she is being naughty enough that it disturbs other people then i will take her outside till she behaves herself.
On a similar note there was this boy in the supermarkey he looked about 2/3 and he was just marching up and down the aisles screaming as loud as he could cos i assume he was bored, and what did the parents do? Laugh in an aww bless him sort of way.
Benefits aren't paid so you can eat out in restaurants. You clearly receive more than you should if you can do that. I recommend you contact the benefits office and negotiate a repayment plan.
I'm NOT joking.
Good God, are you for real - you begrudge a disabled child a meal out? :mad:
Good God, are you for real - you begrudge a disabled child a meal out? :mad:
No, not at all. Thats what the money is there for - to provide them with the ability to go for said meal. I don't expect to actually have to pay for the meal though.
needs - This is help that is reasonably needed, not what is given, nor what is medically essential. This is help to lead as normal a life as possible. This includes help you need outside your home. For example you can be given help to do your own shopping or to take part in "reasonable" social activities.
No, not at all. Thats what the money is there for - to provide them with the ability to go for said meal. I don't expect to actually have to pay for the meal though.
Has that happened to you in a restaurant? You've been asked by someone to pay for a disabled kid's meal?
You think its acceptable at a time when the taxpayer is unable to fund as many treats for themselves, having earned the money that their taxes are used as an entertainment fund?
Basically, these parents are selfish - they want a meal out, to hell with their own kids or other paying customers.
There have been too many concessions made by society towards parents over recent years and now many have a false sense of entitlement - that they and their kids can do as they like as anyone criticising is clearly an awful human being.
Here's a lesson for those arrogant parents: I don't encroach upon your life - you and your kids have no business encroaching upon mine.
I totally agree with you here. It's like as awful as this may sound i've had times where i'm eating out and theres been a little baby at the next table and it's looked my way and i've had a death stare from the parent for carrying on with my meal and not 'cooing' over it. When my daughter was a baby i understood that it was MY lifestyle choice to have her, and i didn't expect anyone at all to make a fuss over another child that wasn't theirs.
Comments
Benefits aren't paid so you can eat out in restaurants. You clearly receive more than you should if you can do that. I recommend you contact the benefits office and negotiate a repayment plan.
I'm NOT joking.
You have an irrational dislike of children. I remember your posts on the subject of parent and child spaces from my previous stint here. You are quite extreme in your views. Very strange behaviour indeed.
Is there an underlying reason?
And as another person, it is lovely to see. A child bumped into me in to me in Asda and it was an accident, the mum could have done nothing to stop him but she made the boy stop and apologise to me. I just thought it was wonderful to see manners being taught. She will probably see her boy grow into a redpectable young man
Nice one
Yes, i don't like the hassle caused by other peoples badly behaved children.
It is unnecessary and usually a product of both poor parenting an an arrogance that indicates that because they're children they can do whatever they like with impunity.
I don't agree (clearly) or accept either - My day to day actions do not adversely impact upon anyone - i don't find it acceptable that bad and/or arrogant parents can negatively impact my life and not be told what a bunch of shitbags they are.
What should a disabled child spend their LIVING allowance on then?
Being supported to do the things their disability preculdes them from. Benefits are not there to pay for treats or entertainment - that is YOUR responsibility.
Benefits are not pocket money. If you have enough to treat it as such then you clearly are recieving too much.
Perhaps you think children shouldn't be anywhere but the blacking factory, or down the mine, or picking oakum at the workhouse?
Any other Victorian things you would like to see reintroduced?
Many. It was a golden era.
You got a problem with that?
Don't be ridiculous.
Yes I thought so. Definitely more to it.
needs - This is help that is reasonably needed, not what is given, nor what is medically essential. This is help to lead as normal a life as possible. This includes help you need outside your home. For example you can be given help to do your own shopping or to take part in "reasonable" social activities.
http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/f23.htm
hope this helps.
On a similar note there was this boy in the supermarkey he looked about 2/3 and he was just marching up and down the aisles screaming as loud as he could cos i assume he was bored, and what did the parents do? Laugh in an aww bless him sort of way.
Good God, are you for real - you begrudge a disabled child a meal out? :mad:
Not at all. Please, carry on
No, not at all. Thats what the money is there for - to provide them with the ability to go for said meal. I don't expect to actually have to pay for the meal though.
Absolutely - the need is the ability to attend the location with relevant support for the meal, it is NOT an entertainment kitty!
Has that happened to you in a restaurant? You've been asked by someone to pay for a disabled kid's meal?
You think its acceptable at a time when the taxpayer is unable to fund as many treats for themselves, having earned the money that their taxes are used as an entertainment fund?
That is preposterous.
Just when I think you cannot sink any lower in your hatred of the unemployed, the disabled, families and children you never fail to disappoint.
Now you're just being silly.
The purpose of the benefit is clear - it is there to support people to undertake activities without being impeded by their disability.
That is not the same as paying for the activity like some kind of treat!
no it isn`t.
Yawn - try fairness, correct use of taxpayer money, using benefits for the purpose they are intended and within the spirit of the grant.
What is the need then? Hmm? A meal in a restaurant is never a need in its own right - it is a want.
I totally agree with you here. It's like as awful as this may sound i've had times where i'm eating out and theres been a little baby at the next table and it's looked my way and i've had a death stare from the parent for carrying on with my meal and not 'cooing' over it. When my daughter was a baby i understood that it was MY lifestyle choice to have her, and i didn't expect anyone at all to make a fuss over another child that wasn't theirs.