[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Call to replace carer's allowance - Page 4 - Carers UK Forum

Call to replace carer's allowance

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
So who is penny_me known as on the UKCarers board?
1-aint that handy, thousands and thousands of carers refusing to care and not one media source picks up on it. You are talking out of an exterior orifice, with all the cut-backs in care services there is no way carers can refuse to care and YOU know that to state otherwise is similar to politico-speak and an attempt to 'spin' information and insulting the intelligence of the carers on here. Your argument is "there are carers refusing to provide care but you will have to take my word for it" It's similar to "there are people being abducted by aliens but there is no proof you will have to take my word for it" To me both statements look ludicrous.

Let's talk ludicrous shall we? In my job as a carers worker I speak to many carers - some of whom have taken the decision to end their caring role. It is not a road many go down, but the choice is there - as Excalibur has also pointed out in the past. No spin, no politico- speak, no lying. You want proof? Ask your local carers centre if I'm right.

2-You use the DWP then say you don't use the DWP, please make your mind up. You state you believe the DWP's figures one minute and disagree the next

What are you talking about? I said the DWP stated that they were not convinced that the idea of ending Carers Allowance was a good one.

3-You are ignoring the statistics not me and your adherence to the census question argument is pretty nigh bordering stupid, it doesn't reflect the true number of carers as you well know, as carers uk well knows, as the government well knows as CARERS well know. So if someone does not need a carer it's THEIR carer that is not being taken into consideration by me!!?? The census question was/is a joke that doesn't differentiate between carers/foster carers/parents and is still being clung to out of desperation by this charity AND YOU. It has no bearing or accuracy regarding carers and the hourly rate was another white elephant. 6 million carers is an extreme over estimation no matter how you count it. If this charity concentrated more on the truth rather than blundering idiocy such as this then it might be worth regarding as slightly worth taking seriously.

You have selected one isolated statistic because taken on its own it suggests that the census figures may be wrong. However, taking ALL the government figures together, they dovetail well and strongly suggest that the 6 million is right. I've given government figures that you conveniently ignore because they undermine your position. Fine. So who's desperate?

Your hourly rate comment is another inaccuracy. The £14.50 figure relates to using care workers from agencies - the preferred route of most people using outside workers. In my area we are paying over £14. You are only correct in that the care workers themselves see much less of it.
As for your credibility (which is questionable because I have seen you bow out of debates like this after a couple of posts stating you won't get into a flame war, it's a ploy used by people to avoid losing an argument though in this thread you have carried on with your undying allegiance to this charity) I find you have none, as for being incredible.

I generally don't like flame wars and avoid them. In your case I'll make an exception. Let's see, you've called me a liar and a coward so far. But at least you know my name because I'm honest about it: that should suggest something about the rest of what I have to say.

Also "Can we get back to the purpose of this web forum now?" Do you mean praising it regardless of how it sides with the government? OK, well done carers uk for not going after what carers EVEN AT YOUR OWN SUMMIT was asking Ivan Lewis for
Again, provide evidence since you're so fond of it.
I think you are referring to research carried out by the University of Leeds for Carers UK. They used census figures based on the number of people who answered the question about whether they cared. These are official figures, not Carers UK figures. They provide a break down by the number of hours spent caring reported by respondents. There are about 1 million people providing over 50 hours care. The research methods employed by the University of Leeds are rigorous - that is why Carers UK commissioned them to carry out the research so it would be robust.
So are carers uk saying that there are as many disabled people NOT claiming DLA or AA as those that ARE? Do you REALLY think this is the case? Tell me which carers you are including IF NOT the ones that provide care for those that officially require it as I'm intrigued here as to what other sorts of carers there are.

You're obviously confused so I'll go slower here. Using the government's own figures, the government says there are 6 million carers, of which about 1 million receive or are entitled to Carers Allowance. You want to concentrate on the 1 million, that's fine. But then you will be ignoring five million other carers who also need support in one way or another.

How about the hourly rate when many 'paid carers' receive half the stated £14.50 an hour?
Already answered. It's perfectly clear.

Robust when it's wrong? The census question is not rigid enough to cover the definition of a carer.
The census question asked if people were providing unpaid care for people who needed it - I've published the text of the question before and still cannot find a weakness in the wording. Please elucidate and point out the weakness that no one else has found.

Before I can retract or withdraw a comment I would need to know which one it was so please clarify before taking your usual heavy-handed censorship, oh, and if you do decide to ban me please remove my name from the membership list
That one's for Gavin to answer - personally I find this situation proof of why some groups find themselves barred from posting on many forums.
No, the government don't say that, the census question 'suggests' that and it's such a vague question it's not accurate in the slightest, it does help the government say "we can't afford to raise carers allowance because there are too many carers" though. Ergo there are NOT 6 million carers as you well know.

You have been told that the hourly rate is based on information from the NHS Information Centre NOT from care workers agencies, care to dispute that? Carers uk care to disagree? Please verify that, I'll leave Charles to apologise later on.

Census question= Do you look after, or give any help or support to family members, neighbours or others because of long term physical or mental ill health or disability, or problems related to old age? I know of foster carers that answered yes to this, would you say that a child with the mildest for of asthma who had someone looking after them would be classed a a "carer" in the real sense of the word? Someone who had gout in old age needed a carer? someone with an ingrowing toenail?headaches? Backache (thinking along the lines of the governments sick-note Britain here) the list of minor illnesses could go on and on and SOME PEOPLE would have answered they WERE a carer to that question.

Who is desperate? I don't know, perhaps someone that thinks disagreeing with misinformation is a flame war? As for evidence, see my post elsewhere which quotes Imelda Redmond "we don't just rant carers allowance is to low"

Hello Snoopy, tell me who you are on UK Carers board and I'll tell you who I am, if in fact I'm on there that is.

Charles, I haven't actually called you a liar and a coward just that you don't, for some reason, get your facts right, I don't know if that is deliberate or poor research on your part, I have said you will defend carers uk regardless of it's performance, that I stand by unless you can point me to posts you have disagreed with the charity?
Enough is enough. The government accepts and quotes the findings of its census. And of all of its other figures, which support each other rather than contradict each other.

You are even misquoting the census question which was much longer than the few words you have selected. If what I have to say about my experiences does not count as proof, the same applies to your foster carer example. Which I have never heard anywhere else.

If you cannot be honest about even a census question what is the point of this discussion other than a pointless CUK-bashing flame war?

How does that help the carers you claim to care so much about?

This web forum was set up to support and help carers who need it. Why do you not show respect for that?