dla to pip

[Lazydaisy]

Death has always been something my family have talked about openly. My elder son has my funeral songs planned.My family has recently been through two more bereavements;one a relative who lived for 70 happy years and was only ill for a couple of months, the other a 32 year old man who dropped dead of a heart attack in front of his mother,after working during the morning. He was a single parent for three young children.His own parents lost one child many years ago to meningitis.
It doesn't matter how much you talk about death and how happy you think you are with the idea, believe me there are deaths that can "knock you off your feet and you will never be able to stand again without support."(a quote from another bereaved parent.)
Paul Newman said his life was divided into two;the life he had before his son died, and the life he had afterwards.
Stan Laurel lost a baby son. He kept his ashes in a glass jar on his desk. Every morning,he went into his office and pressed a finger to the glass jar.Then he went off to work and make the world laugh.
I have changed my thinking about death.

[ladybird]

Just spent ages typing a contribution, hit the wrong button and lost the lot.

Ok. The system needs to be overhauled and they are gong to do this by hook or by crook.
Take a step back, we are in power (in our dreams). Who should be exempt from the medical?
Malc's wife, Eun's son, Kat's mum, my daughter, LD eldest son..who?

We know what we think (and I know what I think) but where and who decides? Terminal means at some point there is a surety of death due to illness, does it mean when? Do those who have maybe a year to live have exemption or those who have 3 years do not?

And for those who do not have terminal conditions but are of a mental state that they cannot answer the questions or it would be profoundly disturbing for them to do so, should they have to attend?

Does the fact that these assessments be done at home for those who cannot attend make any difference at all?

This thread has wavered off it's purpose as these things do. We have gone through Ghanain farmers etc, why it is beyond me. Are we better off than them? Couldn't say because their families may be poor but healthy and able to work for the pittance they get. Plus do we want to take a look at the corrupt governments of so many of these countries who keep their people in poverty? No? No, because it's not relevant to what we are talking about.

Guess the bottom line is we are also talking about empathy and understanding. We expect the governments (whoever they are) to see that our carees shouldn't have to go through this process, especially as the experts have said they shouldn't. We expect common sense but we expect too much..why do we even think they will afford us this?

Empathy has been shown to be lacking here on this thread but then again, there is no actual requirement for it, we just kind of expect other carers to have it. Maybe too much expectation on our part..

For the rest of us who have it and who can imagine ourselves in the situations that some find themselves in, we feel for them. I know what my daughter and I went through with the ESA medical and how I felt. I know what I went through when I too used to wonder why she hadn't got up in the morning, why there wasn't a sound from her room and the fear that used to flash through me, so yes I get it. Not because I choose to focus on it but because I have lived it.
I have lived with somebody with a deeply disturbed mind so I get that too. Even if i hadn't lived it I think I would still "get it"..because I am a carer too.

But I am going to throw off my empathy and ask "who and why"..why not your wife, husband, son, daughter, mother, father, brother, sister? Where DOES the line get drawn? And this I suspect is the problem, if you see what I mean.

The assessments - I do not know what they will involve but working on the assumption that those in need will be visited at home (yes, I know..but let's just work with it)..what is the worst that can happen? That our caree will be upset or anxious or disturbed, that we will be angry at the sheer bloody stupidness of it all..same goes for those that have to visit an assessment centre.

We have all got cases we can quote, reasons why it shouldn't happen but it's going to. So..please refer to my question above.

Thanks and please don't shoot me.

[malc]

ladybird,i think all of us want common sense to kick in and after talking to dla i think it might,i'm hoping the people who actually run the country(the behind the scenes in departments) not the mps have the last say,i've not had a reply off our mp but not surprised at all probably too busy sorting caravan tax and the pastie tax out to bother what a local voter thinks,i won't be shooting anybody today but could highlight your name numerous times in a reply to be condescending towards you if it makes you feel better,but it might make you chuckle instead,it did me!

[daylily]

ladybird you are, of course, bang on.
The thin blue line-where does it get drawn?
No easy answer, so yes, it is probably fairer to assess everyone.
It's a case of 'we only care about those we care for', not that we do not realise what an unheaval all this is going to be for everyone else at the same time but I can only take so much caring on board.
I try to make my point about everyone to my MP's, David ( I understand the disabled) Cameron etc etc.
My point is that my hubby does not know he has Vascular dementia, I have worked extremely hard over the last 5 years to make sure he does not get clinical depression which is common among stroke survivors. He does not realise the extent of his mental disabilities and I see no advantage in enlightening him, it would serve no purpose.
Exactly how are they going to go about assessing him I wonder?
Fearing the worst, after dealing with jobsworths over the last few years,
it will more than likely be a case of 'bull in china shop' approach.
I am not a violent person and I do not swear but they will be shown in no uncertain manner what I think of them if they are tactless and bullying.
To be honest I will just be glad when the whole process is over.

[charles47]

My son will almost certainly be interviewed/assessed. He will be accompanied but no one will answer the questions for him.

I give it maybe 45 seconds.

[malc]

charles,your a genius,you've just gave me an idea,if we have to go and it's a morning appointment,i will hold off on full meds and aricept,take the mobility scooter and just sit there and observe the assessment,i also give it 45 secs,so there you go people if we need to take our carees,atos can see what we see behind closed doors.

[charles47]

charles,your a genius,you've just gave me an idea,if we have to go and it's a morning appointment,i will hold off on full meds and aricept,take the mobility scooter and just sit there and observe the assessment,i also give it 45 secs,so there you go people if we need to take our carees,atos can see what we see behind closed doors.

[poppett]

My memory of the previous shake ups within the benefit system worked better.

Date was set for assessment under the "new rules". Existing claimants got to keep their benefits until their circumstances changed when they were reassessed under the "new rules". Far less stressful to claimants and more cost effective to put into place.

As my husband says often "I may look perfectly OK but you don`t want to be living on the inside".

I also believe that assessments for medical conditions should be done by medical professionals not a box ticking exercise like credit scoring.

On a lighter note when they ask about the claimant`s ability to cook a meal my step-son would tell you his father would need a diagram to find the kitchen!

In the midst of all this dignity must prevail.

Take care
Meg

[Scally]

Spot on. If we want the benefit, then we have to accept there must be some form of test. Nobody is forcing us to apply for financial support from the government, and we therefore have to accept that they cant just throw money at the person who shouts the loudest, that would be crazy.

The empathy test is an interesting one: I find one of the advantages of a forum like this is that one can totally ignore all the warm fuzzy and utterly irrational feelings that normally interfere with logical, calm, evidence-based decision taking, and just go right to the merits of the case. It's the big difference between web-forums and face to face meetings: this is a text forum, so arguments stand or fail on their own internal consistency, not on softer emotional responses to problems like empathy. If you want empathy, face to face is much better than text, if you come to a forum like this, expect to justify your argumement in the cold, clear light of day.

Any objective assessor, faced with interviewing 1:1 with my son for ten or twenty minutes with no help from a carer, would award him highest rate of anything going just to get out of there as fast as possible. I'd love to be a fly on the wall though!

[Eun]

But Scally surely when someone has been already assessed by medical professionals such as specialists, with a life limiting, progressive, incurable condition which has no cure it is a waste of money making that person go through yet another procedure with someone who knows nothing of the condition and will be incentivised to throw them off their benefit?

Eun

[charles47]

But Scally surely when someone has been already assessed by medical professionals such as specialists, with a life limiting, progressive, incurable condition which has no cure it is a waste of money making that person go through yet another procedure with someone who knows nothing of the condition and will be incentivised to throw them off their benefit?

Eun

Precisely - it actually costs more to go through an unnecessary hoop, ignoring for the moment the stress it places on people who can well do without it.

[malc]

idea number 2:-,if the idea of the assessment is to see if the person on dla is capable of getting a job and finding their way to it and remember they've got one,let our carees organise the appointment,remind us when it is,and then they take us instead of we take them,the point would be proved of capability to work when we didn't turn up,ASSESSMENT COMPLETE,it would save any upset for caree and a lot of paperwork,if anybody knows camerons email please forward my suggestion.

[Lazydaisy]

Hear,hear Malc. Very good idea.

[Scally]

Most young non-disabled workers under the age of 25 would fail that test, as you know fine well.

[charles47]

It isn't a test anyone would allow: too easy to fake the result. In fact, don't turn up for your medical, tough. It's as good as withdrawing your claim.

The system is too inflexible, basically, because it's been designed to be policed rather than designed to actually work for those who need it.