I feel quite sorry for her because it's quite clear reading the article she's in complete denial.
True, and I detest this kind of exploitative journalism. I can guarantee that she was led to believe that the Mirror would be running a quite different and far more sympathetic story.
It's hard to know how you would proceed with someone like her. She doesn't sound the sharpest person, but she certainly doesn't sound incapable of making a decision. My guess is that she is immature, mildly depressed, and frightened of surgery. If she won't engage with professionals who could help her, she won't. She can't be made to; nor is there any reason to take away her benefits, which are presumably low (as they all are) and appropriate for her level of disability.
I do wonder how these stories end up in the papers.
Indeed. The real disgrace is not that a woman has lost control of her eating behaviour and become dependent on state support, but that the Mirror has lined up with all the other tabloids in scouring the country for 'people on benefits are greedy wasters' stories. Shame on them.
This is a prime case to demonstrate why benefits claimants should receive food vouchers rather than cash.
She is no such thing. Even if we eliminate benefits claimed by those who are working (which are the majority), 80% of non-working benefits claimants (apart from those on DLA) are back in work within months. By refusing surgery that might remedy her disability, she has put herself into a tiny minority.
I think sectioning, under these circumstances, is actually a very good idea. People with mental health issues can be sectioned if the doctor thinks they need urgent hospital treatment or if they think their health would be at serious risk so I would think this situation would certainly qualify.
I think if you're in that level of denial that you feel you know better than qualified medical professionals then something is wrong. Prader-Willi syndrome can cause excessive, uncontrolled eating and also cause the person to be overly stubborn so that's certainly something that could be looked in to.
But hey ho, she's fat so throw her in jail/stop her benefits/let her eat herself to death e.t.c.....
Much as we would all like to live in a world where everyone lived the perfect healthy lifestyle and didn't support it with tax payers money, the alternative is horrifying.
Sectioning anyone that chose to be fat or smoked at the risk of getting lung disease and so required financial support isn't a world I would wish to live in.
There is a cost to be paid to live in a free and supportive society and that is what I pay my taxes for, no matter if some of it is used by 'scroungers'.
Of course we can't afford to carry on as we have been, but it's usual to start at the top down when 're-structuring' .
Society needs to be far more inclusive and sanctioning attitudes are making people not want to engage even worse.
We need to look at why so many people choose to isolate themselves from the workforce. Not everyone has the emotional capabilities of being part of a team. Perhaps more jobs that allow a person to work from home could be an answer to many of the difficulties.
This thread is comedy.
Thirty years ago such a loon would be in a mental hospital costing triple what she does now. This is the equivalent of 'care in the community', or should I say 'neglect in the community'. She's clearly one bun short of a picnic. Not that she can go out to picnic anymore
:kitty:
I remember seeing this story back in January, perhaps thing have changed since then. Would be good to have a follow up story instead of racking up old news.I do hope this dose not turn into a diet thread.
benefits
19:19, 24 JANUARY 2015
BY GEMMA ALDRIDGE
Morbidly obese Jodie Sinclair weighs 28st and needs a mobility scooter to get around but has declined repeated offers of a free gastric band op
She's getting benefits for being disabled, which is a result of her obesity. At a glance, there does seem to be something wrong with her legs, so there possibly are medical factors other than just eating too much crappy food.
Personally I think her case could be looked at more rigorously though. After all people are getting their JSA sanctioned for reasons like being 5 minutes late for an interview because the bus was delayed.
She's getting benefits for being disabled, which is a result of her obesity. At a glance, there does seem to be something wrong with her legs, so there possibly are medical factors other than just eating too much crappy food.
Personally I think her case could be looked at more rigorously though. After all people are getting their JSA sanctioned for reasons like being 5 minutes late for an interview because the bus was delayed.
You should not get DLA/PIP if your obese and work shy. I don't care if she has mobility problems due to the fat it is not a medical condition that causes disability she has.
I remember seeing this story back in January, perhaps thing have changed since then. Would be good to have a follow up story instead of racking up old news.I do hope this dose not turn into a diet thread.
benefits
19:19, 24 JANUARY 2015
BY GEMMA ALDRIDGE
Morbidly obese Jodie Sinclair weighs 28st and needs a mobility scooter to get around but has declined repeated offers of a free gastric band op
People have to wonder at the mindset of these sorts of people! I mean, does she actually want to stay obese?
I don't like these "let's all point and laugh" newspaper articles. It's obvious she's not very bright, and jeering at her because she doesn't understand why she's so overweight seems cruel.
People like her are disgusting as they just fuel hatred towards those on benefits through no fault of their own, those who would LOVE a chance to change their life if they could. In terms of this woman she will also fuel hatred towards the overweight like me who already get enough abuse, ignorance and mistreatment thrown our way as it is.
What baffles me though is why these people speak to the press. Are they so thick they don't realise it will make them a hate target?
The trouble boils down to mental capacity. While i think maybe a better benefit option would work, people would say its against human rights.
For instance, instead of reveiving benefits in the form of money, she should have her housing paid for directly to the landlord/housing associaltion, and similar for any bills. Instead of getting money each week for food, theres no reason why the government shouldnt be able to provide people like this with food packages. Im thinking along the lines of a dietician working out a healthy eating plan and the recipient only being allowed to claim those foods so that they are eating a balanced healthy diet. Maybe then they could receive a small amount of money for other essentials.
The trouble is if someone has the mental capacity to decide for themselves, theres not an awful lot you can do. I work in a hospital and each morning every patient has a wash. Occasionally we get people point blank refuse to wash. If they do we cant force them and they have to be assessed as to whether they have mental capacity. If they do and its clear they know the consequences of not washing but still refuse, then we cannot force them. This can go on for weeks/months.
This is exactly the same for morbidly obese people. They are able to refuse treatment and help and theres nothing that can be done. You cant force someone to lose weight. This is only really enforcable if someone is unable to look after themselves, eg if its a child and the parents are overfeeding, or if someone has severe learning difficulties and their carer isnt looking at their best interests.
I don't like these "let's all point and laugh" newspaper articles. It's obvious she's not very bright, and jeering at her because she doesn't understand why she's so overweight seems cruel.
Personally I'm sick of everyone pussyfooting around selfish, bone-idle, greedy people like this.
Tax-payers are shelling out their hard-earned cash to enable this woman to sit there in her hovel, stuff her face and blurt out excuse after excuse as to why she doesn't want to accept help to get her life back on track.
Enough is enough.
Her case needs to be reviewed and she should be enrolled in some sort of compulsory exercise program, otherwise she shouldn't get paid as much as she does now.
She's getting benefits for being disabled, which is a result of her obesity. At a glance, there does seem to be something wrong with her legs, so there possibly are medical factors other than just eating too much crappy food.
Personally I think her case could be looked at more rigorously though. After all people are getting their JSA sanctioned for reasons like being 5 minutes late for an interview because the bus was delayed.
I doubt she can get on a bus so it's a good job she's got a mobility scooter though that won't take the strain for long. Bed bound for two years and now even has people coming in to bath her.
Comments
Chips retention more like.....
It's hard to know how you would proceed with someone like her. She doesn't sound the sharpest person, but she certainly doesn't sound incapable of making a decision. My guess is that she is immature, mildly depressed, and frightened of surgery. If she won't engage with professionals who could help her, she won't. She can't be made to; nor is there any reason to take away her benefits, which are presumably low (as they all are) and appropriate for her level of disability. Indeed. The real disgrace is not that a woman has lost control of her eating behaviour and become dependent on state support, but that the Mirror has lined up with all the other tabloids in scouring the country for 'people on benefits are greedy wasters' stories. Shame on them. She is no such thing. Even if we eliminate benefits claimed by those who are working (which are the majority), 80% of non-working benefits claimants (apart from those on DLA) are back in work within months. By refusing surgery that might remedy her disability, she has put herself into a tiny minority.
Much as we would all like to live in a world where everyone lived the perfect healthy lifestyle and didn't support it with tax payers money, the alternative is horrifying.
Sectioning anyone that chose to be fat or smoked at the risk of getting lung disease and so required financial support isn't a world I would wish to live in.
There is a cost to be paid to live in a free and supportive society and that is what I pay my taxes for, no matter if some of it is used by 'scroungers'.
Of course we can't afford to carry on as we have been, but it's usual to start at the top down when 're-structuring' .
Society needs to be far more inclusive and sanctioning attitudes are making people not want to engage even worse.
We need to look at why so many people choose to isolate themselves from the workforce. Not everyone has the emotional capabilities of being part of a team. Perhaps more jobs that allow a person to work from home could be an answer to many of the difficulties.
Confusing, no?
Thirty years ago such a loon would be in a mental hospital costing triple what she does now. This is the equivalent of 'care in the community', or should I say 'neglect in the community'. She's clearly one bun short of a picnic. Not that she can go out to picnic anymore
:kitty:
A little hypocritical Tinks.
Am surprised he isn't claiming some form of carers allowance.
benefits
19:19, 24 JANUARY 2015
BY GEMMA ALDRIDGE
Morbidly obese Jodie Sinclair weighs 28st and needs a mobility scooter to get around but has declined repeated offers of a free gastric band op
She's getting benefits for being disabled, which is a result of her obesity. At a glance, there does seem to be something wrong with her legs, so there possibly are medical factors other than just eating too much crappy food.
Personally I think her case could be looked at more rigorously though. After all people are getting their JSA sanctioned for reasons like being 5 minutes late for an interview because the bus was delayed.
You should not get DLA/PIP if your obese and work shy. I don't care if she has mobility problems due to the fat it is not a medical condition that causes disability she has.
Whether or she believes it or not is another matter altogether....
People have to wonder at the mindset of these sorts of people! I mean, does she actually want to stay obese?
Are you sure she wasn't an immigrant too?
She might like the attention and not having to work. It is likely she has severe depression and has let herself go.
I have no sympathy for people like this.
I don't know but I am sure the Daily Mail are trying to find out her heritage as we speak.
Yeah, let's just cull the fatties!! Wooooooo!!!! Let all the perfectly faultless people surive!! Wooooooooo!!!
What baffles me though is why these people speak to the press. Are they so thick they don't realise it will make them a hate target?
For instance, instead of reveiving benefits in the form of money, she should have her housing paid for directly to the landlord/housing associaltion, and similar for any bills. Instead of getting money each week for food, theres no reason why the government shouldnt be able to provide people like this with food packages. Im thinking along the lines of a dietician working out a healthy eating plan and the recipient only being allowed to claim those foods so that they are eating a balanced healthy diet. Maybe then they could receive a small amount of money for other essentials.
The trouble is if someone has the mental capacity to decide for themselves, theres not an awful lot you can do. I work in a hospital and each morning every patient has a wash. Occasionally we get people point blank refuse to wash. If they do we cant force them and they have to be assessed as to whether they have mental capacity. If they do and its clear they know the consequences of not washing but still refuse, then we cannot force them. This can go on for weeks/months.
This is exactly the same for morbidly obese people. They are able to refuse treatment and help and theres nothing that can be done. You cant force someone to lose weight. This is only really enforcable if someone is unable to look after themselves, eg if its a child and the parents are overfeeding, or if someone has severe learning difficulties and their carer isnt looking at their best interests.
Tax-payers are shelling out their hard-earned cash to enable this woman to sit there in her hovel, stuff her face and blurt out excuse after excuse as to why she doesn't want to accept help to get her life back on track.
Enough is enough.
Her case needs to be reviewed and she should be enrolled in some sort of compulsory exercise program, otherwise she shouldn't get paid as much as she does now.
Who would want to emulate him?