I promise I wont do political rants on here (as if I started, I don’t think I’d stop) BUT this has got to be said.
David Cameron & his wife are both Millionaires in their own rights. They both come from extremely wealthy families (of millionaires) also. However, when their son was sadly born with a disability, they turned to the publicly (Tax payers) funded welfare system in their time of need.
When they needed equipment, DLA, Carers allowance, money for nappies & transport & food etc, the welfare system answered their call for help. The welfare system did not question their status or whether they were “deserving” of its help – it did what it was set up to do. It assisted a family in time of need.
Sadly their son Ivan passed away in 2009 and I (although I have never been a conservative) was pleased at least those who (at that point) I was assisting via charity work, had a PM that truly would understand the needs of a family in a tough situation & the relief of having the welfare system we in Great Britain are so proud of.
Since he came to power however – this man has steadily dismantled the NHS, Support groups, and the welfare state he leaned upon in his time of need. He has done this with no thought for the families (or Ivan’s) out there he is affecting….
Here are a few stories —-
In 2015 a 10 Year old Cerebral Palsy Sufferer and her parents had their income slashed after their Carers allowance was stopped suddenly.
IN Nov 2015 a Disabled man died of a heart attack just 1 hour after being told by letter he was Fit for work, (even after charities had called the DWP to explain he was too ill to attend). He received the letter regarding a last chance meeting & threat of sanctions the day he had left hospital & died 1 hour afterwards.
In 2013 a Diabetic man died after he couldn’t pay the electric meter, after being “sanctioned” & left penniless. His fridge stopped working, hence he couldn’t keep his insulin cold…. This was an Ex-Soldier with a 20+ year work history. Yet as he was unwell / caring for a dementia suffering mother he was sanctioned for not attending Job centre meetings.
There are so many more, BUT it depresses me to even bring them here – I am just so frustrated with it all.
MY point is – How come no one is asking why?
Why is / was it ok for this to happen?
Now the Transition is also happening from DLA to PIP which is also throwing people off of the “DLA” “Gravy train” (Sorry that’s sarcasm)…. I know of people who are now surviving on NO MONEY – Living off of friends… They are still disabled (God that sounds so stupid) BUT they are not, not according to the new way the GOV assesses it. They cannot work (some do not have limbs) BUT they are now not eligible for DLA.
Taken from another Blog site – Written by a nurse – IT Just sums it all up
The assessment for PIP requires claimants to attend face-to-face consultations, unless they’re housebound or unable to travel for medical reasons. Dave* has multiple sclerosis. Although he is not technically “housebound” it would be an enormous task for him to attend a consultation because he is wheelchair bound and doesn’t have easy access to disabled-friendly transport. It would be mentally overwhelming too, because beneath the bravado of a bloke who used to run a building site, Dave like many other disabled people has suffered a huge loss of confidence. The prospect would cause him unnecessary distress and it would take days to recover from the mental and physical upheaval of having been. But practical obstacles and vulnerable states of mind do not count as excuses to avoid these consultations.
Jane* has Parkinson’s disease and a rare condition that causes jaw spasms and excessive dribbling. She sees a specialist twice a year who is “managing” her well – she receives treatment, of varying success rates, for her medical conditions. So her doctor could feasibly suggest that Jane copes alright at home. If this testimony is the extent of Jane’s supporting evidence then her assessment will be inaccurate and overlook the practical tasks she cannot complete and the social interactions she cannot have. Jane’s doctor doesn’t know she spends her days hunched over a bin of wet tissues, often crying, with a constant stream of saliva pouring from her mouth. Nor should they be expected to, because they do not live and work alongside her.
Since PIP is supposed to improve disabled people’s “ability to participate in society”, assessors should surely be concerned with living socially as opposed to surviving medically. As it stands, the new assessment and its preoccupation with medical evidence will fail people like Jane & Dave.