Open Letter In The Guardian

 Here

The government's implementation of welfare reform is destroying the covenant of care between disabled people and the welfare state (Report, 23 February). The most vulnerable people in our country are being subjected to cruelty. The work capability assessment is not fit for purpose. It is denying employment support allowance to those whom the 2007 Welfare Reform Act deemed it not reasonable to require to work.

The assessment lacks public and medical accountability. Criteria about what constitutes an "illness" and a "disability" have been increasingly narrowed over the years into a set of descriptors that fail to recognise the complex problems and needs of those who are mentally ill, or who have intermittent illnesses or communicative conditions.

We want a system that is flexible and supportive of disabled people and which helps people into good, appropriate jobs with decent wages. One that values and supports those who are unable to work, and that insures us all against the misfortunes of illness and disability.

Jon Cruddas MP Labour, Dagenham & Rainham, Neil Coyle Director of policy, Disability Alliance, Anna Healy Labour, House of Lords, Gavin Hayes General secretary, Compass, Professor Jonathan Rutherford Middlesex University, Professor Peter Beresford Brunel University, Steve Griffiths Researcher and Consultant, Rhydian Fôn James The Broken of Britain, Frances Kelly, Rosemary O'Neil Carerwatch, Alison Wiles, Anna Kennedy, Carole Rutherford co-founders, Act Now -

Petition To Halt Closure Of 5 Wirral Respite Care Homes

Please could all my readers sign this petition* to halt the closure of 5 respite care homes in Wirral, at least until staff, carers and cared for have been properly consulted and advised about alternatives.

*Yes, I know the petition site is a nightmare, sorry! Please, please sign anyway.

False Economy - 50,000 NHS job losses

Campaign Group False Economy formally launch today with the exclusive revelation that they have uncovered 50,000 NHS job losses.

The Welfare Reform Bill And Disability - By Rhydian Fon James

The Welfare Reform Bill (Bill 154) was unveiled by David Cameron yesterday, after being introduced in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 16th of February 2011. The Bill is quite controversial, and will provoke varying reactions depending on your political leanings. The Broken of Britain will not get involved in the general provisions of the Bill – as a non-party political group this is beyond our mandate, whatever individual members of the group may say in a personal capacity. However, provisions that affect disabled people are, most certainly, our business. Below is an analysis of the Bill and disability.

Part 1 of the Bill contains provisions and confers regulation-making powers for the new Universal Credit. Universal credit will be paid to people both in and out of work, replacing working tax credit, child tax credit, housing benefit, council tax benefit, IS, income- based JSA and income-related ESA. The stated aim of universal credit is to smooth the transition into work by reducing the support a person receives at a consistent rate as their earnings increase. The financial support provided by universal credit will be underpinned by responsibilities which claimants may be required to meet.

Clause 4 sets out the basic conditions for entitlement, including that the claimant must accept a claimant commitment which contains the requirements that a claimant will be expected to meet in return for receiving universal credit. These requirements are set out in clauses 13 to 28 – no work-related requirements if the claimant has limited capability for work-related activity, work preparation if the claimant is found to have limited capability for work, and claimants subject to work search and availability requirements otherwise, with Clause 26 setting out harsh sanction for failure to meet any of these requirements. Subsection (1)(b) of Clause 6 prevents a person from being entitled to universal credit if they only meet the conditions of entitlement for a short period, to be prescribed in regulations – this will increase the difficulty of getting out-of-work support where disability is acute.

Clause 11 provides for an amount to be included for housing costs. A person’s
maximum amount may include an amount for housing costs if the claimant is liable to
make payments on their home. This could be in the form of rent, mortgage costs or
other housing-related costs. Where the amount for housing relates to a liability to pay
rent, it is intended that the amount will be calculated with reference to a claimant’s
household size and circumstances as well as their actual rent, as is the case currently
in housing benefit. There are changes being made to housing benefit that will be harmful to disabled people, and we must block these to avoid them being carried over.

It is clear that the most effective way to make provision for disabled people in this Part of the Bill is to amend Clause 38 which provides powers relating to the determination of limited capability for work and limited capability for work-related activity owing to a physical or mental condition. A person’s capability for work may determine the work-related requirements which may be imposed. The intention is that the clause allows for the same provision as for ESA in sections 8 and 9 of Welfare Reform Act 2007.

Part 2 of the Bill makes provision for changes to the responsibilities of claimants of JSA, ESA and IS in the period leading up to the introduction of universal credit. In particular provision is made for the introduction of a claimant commitment, in the same way as in Part 1. The claimant commitment will be a record of the requirements claimants are expected to meet in order to receive benefit and the consequences should they fail to do so. Once the universal credit clauses have come into force, ESA and JSA will continue alongside universal credit as contributory benefits.

Clause 51 must be deleted, as it time-limits entitlement to contributory ESA to 365, even where the period of limited capability for work exceeds this period, though days during which a claimant is in the support group will not count towards the 365 days of entitlement.. In particular, this may plunge couples where one or both partners are disabled into poverty, as claimants will be subject to harsh means test after this period. Additionally, subsection (3)(a) provides that claimants who are already receiving contributory ESA when the time limit is introduced will have the period that they have already spent on the benefit counted towards their 365 days of entitlement. Clause 53 and Clause 56 must be amended as it provides for the same claimant commitment and responsibilities as in the Universal Credit, with the same flaws as discussed above.

As well as the changes to be made in the interim period this Part also introduces longer-term reforms to align ESA and JSA more closely with the provisions for universal credit. Clauses 49 and 56 insert new sections into the Jobseekers Act 1995 and the Welfare Reform Act 2007 which replicate those for universal credit which relate to work-related requirements and sanctions, apart from where small differences are necessary, so that what can be expected of a claimant of contributory JSA or ESA is the same as it would be for a similar claimant of universal credit.

Part 4 is the most interesting for disabled people, discussing the Personal Independence Payment, before the DLA reform consultation has closed! In June 2010 the Government announced, as part of the Emergency Budget, its intention to reform disability living allowance from 2013-14. Subsequently, in December 2010, a consultation paper Disability Living Allowance reform (Cm 7984) was published. The consultation paper sets out the Government’s proposals to replace disability living allowance with a personal independence payment. The provisions in Part 4 set out the framework for the new benefit, while the consultation responses will feed into the detailed design of the benefit which will be provided for in secondary legislation.

This Part of the Bill must be deleted in its entirety, for the reasons that The Broken of Britain is opposed to the Personal Independence Payment. Notwithstanding the facts that the DLA reform consultation was not closed when the Bill was published, that the consultation is deeply flawed, that there is no evidence that DLA reform is required, and that DLA reform will cause hardship for disabled people, the provisions for PIP are regressive. The reduction in the number of rates of PIP has been decided before the consultation ends, as has the decision to assess prescribed activities to determine awards, and the decision to require that a person be disabled for six months prior to claiming. It has also been decided that that if a claimant is an in-patient of a hospital or similar institution, or resident in a care home, and receives “qualifying services” (as defined in subsection (4)), which are paid for to any extent out of public or local funds, regulations may provide that no amount of the daily living or mobility components of personal independence payment is payable.

The Broken of Britain is exploring various avenues to ensure that the desired changes are made to the Bill, including the complete deletion of Part 4.

Death Threats - By Sue Marsh

 Originally posted here

Laura is 29 years old. Until a few years ago, she was a vet, just qualified and looking forward to her future. She was engaged to Paul and they were planning their wedding. She lived a pretty "normal" life, in a "normal" home and enjoyed walking holidays and playing "cool auntie" with her young nieces and nephews.

Her wages had improved! Finally, after all those years of studying, she could afford the odd luxury. She and Paul treated themselves to a weekend away to Barcelona when she got her first "proper job" and soon after, she'd bought a lovely new car. 

************************

For a while though, she'd been getting shooting pains in her hips and knees. crouching on concrete floors, treating sick animals, or hours in the cold and damp waiting for a new foal had become very uncomfortable. One day, she found she physically couldn't get up from the floor and had to wait for someone to come and help. 

She went to her GP a few times, but he didn't seem to think much was wrong. He suggested she take paracetamol for the pain and take it easy in the cold. 

She carried on doing her job, but it became harder and harder. Soon, getting out of bed took 5 or 10 minutes - her joints felt stiff and painful and she seemed constantly exhausted. She started to hobble a bit, embarrassed, but unable to help it. 

When she got in from work all she wanted to do was fall into bed. She took all the paracetamol she could and  even added in some ibruprofen, but things just got worse and worse. She never wanted to go out to dinner or have sex, walking holidays seemed unimaginable and she was always irritable with pain or exhaustion. Despite feeling exhausted all the time, she got less and less sleep. As the pain increased, she could no longer find any way of getting comfortable or relaxing. 

It took a year or so before her doctor referred her to a specialist. By then, she could barely walk, shuffling like an old lady. Her skin was pale with exhaustion, her hair was dull and the dark circles under her eyes made her look haunted. The consultant ran a few tests and then gave her the news that she had arthritis. What's more, it was a particularly virulent case of early onset disease. It was degenerative and her symptoms would only get worse. He told her there was no cure and the words rang in her ears. There were however treatments they could use that might slow the progress of the disease or even bring about remission. 

The first treatment made no difference at all. The second gave her debilitating, splitting headaches and the third (which she was warned carried a risk of brain tumours) made her vomit almost constantly. The consultant finally prescribed the strongest drug available to him and Laura had to learn to give herself injections in her tummy every two weeks to take the medication. For a while, the injections seemed to work, but then they just stopped. There was nothing else to try and she simply fought on through the pain, taking strong opiate painkillers when she couldn't bear it any more. 

She had to stop working. Her precious job, her animals, her ambitions and dreams all seemed to be slipping away. She applied for Employment Support Allowance ( ESA. Previously Incapacity Benefit) but was found  fit for work after a humiliating "assessment" where she was asked to touch her toes and climb some little wooden steps. 

Sadly, Paul couldn't cope. Life had changed so completely, he no longer recognised the woman he lived with. She wasn't happy-go-lucky or carefree any more and their romance slowly fell apart. In the end, he left her. Their home had to be sold and Laura found herself applying for housing benefit and renting a tiny one bed flat above a shop. The stairs were like a mountain now, so she rarely went anywhere at all any more. She found it increasingly hard to have a shower or cook a meal - her fingers were stiff and swollen with arthritis too by now and the local council were only able to provide care for a few hours twice a week. 

Her sisters couldn't care for her very much - they had busy lives of their own and she missed the kid's laughter and rolling around on the floor with them or playing tickles or chase. Suddenly she had so much time but nothing to fill it with. 

It seemed like every day she had to fill in another form or attend anther work programme, but at the same time, all she heard on the news was that most sick or disabled people were scroungers or skivers. She started to weep too often for her old life and had lost so much so quickly, that she struggled to deal with the barrage of emotions she felt. 

Where she used to be self-sufficient, now she was reliant, where she used to be energetic, now she was exhausted. Luxuries were forgotten and she worried about putting the heating on or buying food - after her rent had been paid, she only had just under £400 to pay for everything else.  

Sometimes she wondered what on earth had gone wrong? How had she gone from a vibrant, happy young woman with a whole life of plans ahead of her into this? 

********************

For a few days there has been a debate over whether it is counter-productive to discuss the risk of rising suicide rates in the broader debate over cuts to sickness and disability benefits. Today, a passionate campaigner for disabled rights wrote this article for the Guardian. I agree with very much of what she says, but I don't agree that talk of suicide is being used in this debate as a tool or a threat. I think that given stories like Laura's it is a worrying possibility. This is a group of people just like Laura, who already face terrible challenges and I do believe some are unable to cope with the extra guilt and fear they also now face. 

I found the comments that followed the article depressing. So many seemed to think that stories of despair and hopelessness were exaggerated or that talk of ending one's life was some form of militancy used to blackmail the government with. 

Since I've started writing this blog, I've been shocked by how many sick or disabled people say they can't go on. Not dramatically, but matter-of-factly. Time and time again. At least weekly, I've heard from people in despair, unable to go through another assessment or take yet another cut in their already meagre lifestyles.

If people are wanting to debate with this shocking degree of candour, then I think we should all be listening. Few people wish to discuss suicide on a public forum and if they start to do so in significant numbers, I can only believe that alarm bells should be ringing. 

I discovered this week that no-one actually keeps statistics into how much more likely sick or disabled people are to end their own lives. One NHS document reports that it is a "significant risk factor" but the ONS confirmed to me that they had no studies at all on record. With this in mind, if suicide does increase amongst this vulnerable group, no-one will know. 

A full and frank debate needs to base itself on facts. Not hysteria or threats, but information. In searching for that information, some unpalatable subjects might turn up. But dismissing a debate about them is surely not a solution?


TODAY'S SIMPLE ACTION : This is a sensitive issue. Nonetheless I think it important to try to explain why people might feel so desperate. To understand the support we need, people must understand our lives. 
WILL YOU SEND THIS TO JUST ONE PERSON WHO ISN'T SICK OR DISABLED? Someone you trust to read it and try to understand? Either by email or twitter or facebook or by writing to you MP or local paper? We need to expand the debate and reach those who don't know much about these issues. As ever THANK YOU
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)