Will no-one stand up for the disabled ?

[Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
Forum Member
✭✭
Cameron, Clegg and now Miliband are prepared to join in on the reform of Disability Living Allowance and Incapacity Benefits using new assessments designed to fail most claimants, will no politician stand up for the disabled ? Are their votes unwanted ? There are perhaps 3 million of them. Perhaps the disabled should organise a voting boycott of the main parties until someone will defend them, as at the moment the political parties appear to marginalise them and even demonise them. Why do politician appear to create an atmosphere of hatred against the disabled, who, without representation will become a weak group in society ?

It should be remembered that Hitler began a policy of mercy-killing of the disabled in the extermination camaps before proceeding on to the Jews. Are the disabled in this country viewed as "untermenschen" as Hitler would ?

It seems the current policy is to push the disabled through unpassable tests, label them fit to work when they are clearly not, using dubious methods (pressuring doctors to fail them), which will result in them starving without benefits.

It is said that you can always sign on Jobseekers' Allowance, but you have to have a reasonable chance of getting a job to get Jobseekers' Allowance. This is a perfect Catch-22 situation. You cannot get Disability Living Allowance because you are assessed as not disabled, but you cannot get Jobseekers' Allowance unless you are capable of working, which will not be the case.

This is beginning to become persecution of the disabled with propaganda, suggesting the disabled are putting it on, and are cheating the system.

No politician will put their head above the parapet and defend the disabled, so they should organise a voting boycott of the main parties.
«13456

Comments

  • alsmamaalsmama Posts: 4,564
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I'd have thought that people who were genuinely disabled (and could prove it) would have nothing to worry about. They're not proposing cutting benefits from the genuinely disabled, are they?
  • VoynichVoynich Posts: 14,481
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    :( You're not helping.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 22,380
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    alsmama wrote: »
    I'd have thought that people who were genuinely disabled (and could prove it) would have nothing to worry about. They're not proposing cutting benefits from the genuinely disabled, are they?[/QUOTE
    ]


    No its all the pretenders.......I know of two who are always extremly ill when it comes to reassessments, however the rest of the time the pubs haunts are not affected at all..its a joke and time they were held to account.
  • alsmamaalsmama Posts: 4,564
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Voynich wrote: »
    :( You're not helping.

    Was that aimed at me? I'm afraid I felt that the OP was basicallyoverreacting ... I can't imagine much of what was said actually being on the agenda. Bit of a kneejerk reaction to the idea of tightening up on benefit fraud, I thought.
  • jsmith99jsmith99 Posts: 20,382
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    alsmama wrote: »
    I'd have thought that people who were genuinely disabled (and could prove it) would have nothing to worry about. They're not proposing cutting benefits from the genuinely disabled, are they?

    I agree ...the people who aren't genuinely disabled can stand up for themselves.
  • cosmocosmo Posts: 26,840
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    alsmama wrote: »
    I'd have thought that people who were genuinely disabled (and could prove it) would have nothing to worry about. They're not proposing cutting benefits from the genuinely disabled, are they?

    Quite right.
  • tghe-retfordtghe-retford Posts: 26,449
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    alsmama wrote: »
    I'm afraid I felt that the OP was basicallyoverreacting...
    I'll post this blog link to a Guardian blog back in 2008, where the changes now coming in could, according to a professor at Brunel University, make disabled people, particularly those with mental health disabilities, consider suicide as a better alternative to being stuck on the dole or being resigned to low paid manual work.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/joepublic/2008/mar/18/mydeathmightbeseenasaco

    The OPs post, whilst pessimistic in tone, probably isn't as far away from reality as we may think.
  • paralaxparalax Posts: 12,127
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Unfortunately whilst I'm sure that the majority of claimants are genuine, it is the ones who have abused the system and those who let them that have caused this and assessing everyone claiming is the only way to pull out the malingerers and the bone idle, the genuinely ill or disabled will have nothing to worry about, and those who are borderline, i.e. who do have a problem but could do some kind of work will hopefully get the help they need.
  • VoynichVoynich Posts: 14,481
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    alsmama wrote: »
    Was that aimed at me? I'm afraid I felt that the OP was basicallyoverreacting ... I can't imagine much of what was said actually being on the agenda. Bit of a kneejerk reaction to the idea of tightening up on benefit fraud, I thought.

    Sorry, at the OP. Your post wasn't there when I posted. The stuff about Hitler doesn't help and switches people off.
  • KierkegaardKierkegaard Posts: 74
    Forum Member
    They'll be just fine.
  • PFKA EBPFKA EB Posts: 1,900
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It is truly frightening the way the British public can close their eyes and ears to what is happening at westminster and in the press, the actions of both the last government and this one and ATOS healthcare has earned the condemnation of the citizens advice bureau and a wide range of DISABLED PEOPLES CHARITIES (not groups you would associate with fakers benefit scroungers and the people you lot have immediately tried to position this thread with) Already terminally ill, paraplegic and cancer sufferers in the middle of chemotherapy have been denied sickness benefits by ATOS assessors using the new system which is a performance pay led system, they are paid extra for every person they deny benefit to.

    So please dont become appeasers or apologists for a government hell bent on putting those too ill to work onto the unemployment scrap heap, because for them that is exactly what it will be. This government is labelling everyone who is legitimately claiming benefit, asocial, it makes no difference to them that someone is terminally ill because this only works if everyone has a irrational hatred of benefit claimants. Hence the press blitz we had before the party conferences and in the build up to the big announcements about cuts to welfare, you will get a glut if stories about cheats and fraud.

    There is a campaign against the demonisation of the disabled (and it has been a campaign when seen from the side of the disabled) running on facebook because of what has been going on.
  • alanr74alanr74 Posts: 4,684
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Can't the disabled stand on their own 2 feet?

    Sounds very patronising that they are disabled, and thus can't help themselves.
  • alsmamaalsmama Posts: 4,564
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Voynich wrote: »
    Sorry, at the OP. Your post wasn't there when I posted. The stuff about Hitler doesn't help and switches people off.

    Phew :D
  • koantemplationkoantemplation Posts: 101,293
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    It seems that in the witch hunt for the benefit scroungers, some people don't mind kicking the disabled when they are down.
  • rossi_drrossi_dr Posts: 1,206
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It will effect some genuine disabled though
    child benefit goal posts moved
    disabled goal posts moved
    winter fuel payments possible goal posts moved

    I'm sure some GENUINE Disabled will be hit by this not the one's who got through the net
    it's got to hit some that are genuine disabled bcs the goal posts are being moved

    and they will end up on jobseeker's with there Disability's still there & there needs still there
    and they will miss out on the group that need back to work support as well
    it's going to happen :(
  • paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    And why should we consider the disabled unable to have a productive work life? - I have known at least two who would be classed as disabled - one physical, he was confined to a wheelchair, and another with a sleeping disorder.

    Both have successful working lives and one runs a business.

    While undoubtably some disabilities are such that the cost of living is higher (adaption of cars, use of buggies, lifts in a house) - the fact is there is no reason why a disabled person cannot have a full life and that includes employment.

    To assume that one cannot work because they are disabled is as bad in it's way as denying help to those that need it.
  • GARETH197901GARETH197901 Posts: 22,291
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I suggest anyone who thinks that the upcoming changes with respects to ESA and DLA wont affect Genuine Disabled and Long Term Sick people read the posts on the site in the link

    http://interactive.dwp.gov.uk/the-work-programme-discussion-forum/conditionality-for-esa-customers

    The People who replied on this site, aren't a number or a Statistic or a Benefit Scrounger,they are Genuine Disabled or Sick person who have quite frankly been failed by the system, assessed by a person with a few weeks Generic Disabled training,using a computer system that in all honesty isn't fit for purpose,all in the name of welfare reform.
  • TassiumTassium Posts: 31,639
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And why should we consider the disabled unable to have a productive work life? - I have known at least two who would be classed as disabled - one physical, he was confined to a wheelchair, and another with a sleeping disorder.

    Both have successful working lives and one runs a business.

    While undoubtably some disabilities are such that the cost of living is higher (adaption of cars, use of buggies, lifts in a house) - the fact is there is no reason why a disabled person cannot have a full life and that includes employment.

    To assume that one cannot work because they are disabled is as bad in it's way as denying help to those that need it.

    That belongs in another thread.


    This thread is about assessments that declare the genuinely seriously ill as fit, just a few minutes looking around confirms this is happening.

    I can't recall when the disabled in this country were so demonised by all political parties. People say if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to fear.

    Well we've heard that one before!

    It's an unprecidented situation in the UK, more akin to what has happened in the past in certain other countries.

    And the politicians are doing it for selfish reasons, their own careers.
  • PFKA EBPFKA EB Posts: 1,900
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And why should we consider the disabled unable to have a productive work life? - I have known at least two who would be classed as disabled - one physical, he was confined to a wheelchair, and another with a sleeping disorder.

    Both have successful working lives and one runs a business.

    While undoubtably some disabilities are such that the cost of living is higher (adaption of cars, use of buggies, lifts in a house) - the fact is there is no reason why a disabled person cannot have a full life and that includes employment.

    To assume that one cannot work because they are disabled is as bad in it's way as denying help to those that need it.

    to assume that everyone who is disabled is able to work in some way just because some people who are disabled are able to work is just as bad in its way as as denying help to those that need it.

    There is NO one size fits all test or statement for this subject, I despair at the blinkered attitude people are taking.

    They came for the immigrants and I said nothing,
    They came for the single mothers and I said nothing,
    They came for the poles and I said nothing,
    They came for the hoodies and I said nothing
    They came for the disabled and there was no one to speak for me.
  • pxd867pxd867 Posts: 11,489
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jsmith99 wrote: »
    I agree ...the people who aren't genuinely disabled can stand up for themselves.
    literally.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,469
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think that people with mental health issues are the group which may suffer most from the governments proposals. Most people with mental health problems don't immediately appear to have issues that might prevent them from getting work.

    Otherwise the jist of the proposals seem to be to help people get into work. Sure, they will probably catch out the scroungers too - and about time too - but that is not the main thrust of the coalitions proposals.

    The idea, as I understand it is to find people jobs that they can do. For example (and I am going back some years now) I knew somone who had been a delivery driver which involved humping the goods delivered at the start and end of the journey. Unfortunately, back problems started and he could no longer do that job, and he went on disability benefit.

    Now this person was educated and could easily have done a desk job. All he needed was some basic computer training and a chair set up for his back and he could have been back to work. This is what should have happened. Instead he was on the sick until he retired.
  • PaacePaace Posts: 14,679
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jsmith99 wrote: »
    I agree ...the people who aren't genuinely disabled can stand up for themselves.

    Along with the physically disabled there are people with mental disabilities who will be affected.

    What concerned me the most is that those doing the testing don't have to be medically qualified only tick boxes on a piece of paper.
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 12,830
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Politicians seem to think there is more mileage in denouncing the disabled than in supporting them. Why attack the weakest in society ? Why not attack the rich or media barons ?
  • alanr74alanr74 Posts: 4,684
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    petertard wrote: »
    Politicians seem to think there is more mileage in denouncing the disabled than in supporting them. Why attack the weakest in society ? Why not attack the rich or media barons ?


    Why not attack both?

    I'm quite happy attacking the ones you call 'weakest' (people with back ache), and the rich and media barons (the ones you're jealous of).

    Actually, I would rather attack the liars, cheats and frauds from all walks of life. Pretty much what the government does do.
  • CythnaCythna Posts: 3,102
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    And why should we consider the disabled unable to have a productive work life? - I have known at least two who would be classed as disabled - one physical, he was confined to a wheelchair, and another with a sleeping disorder.

    Both have successful working lives and one runs a business.

    While undoubtably some disabilities are such that the cost of living is higher (adaption of cars, use of buggies, lifts in a house) - the fact is there is no reason why a disabled person cannot have a full life and that includes employment.

    To assume that one cannot work because they are disabled is as bad in it's way as denying help to those that need it.

    Yes, many disabled people can work, and look at how successful the disabled athletes are. However the sick are not in such a happy position. People with degenerative diseases, MS, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Macular degeneration, for example, people in constant pain, people who tire quickly, are breathless, use the toilet every hour, these are reasons why a "a disabled person cannot have a full life and that includes employment."
Sign In or Register to comment.