Benefit sanctions

Yeah, because the government is bound to listen to what the Daily Mirror says. Those epetitions are two-a-penny.

(Wonder why the sister in that case didn't help her brother out instead of just kicking up a fuss after he was dead) And why would his not giving himself the necessary insulin (which caused his death) have anything to do with benefits payments? Very sad, but hard to take at face value.

From another Mirror article:

"But a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister has brushed off calls for change.

Asked if it was right that a diabetic man had had his benefits taken away she said: “Judgments that are made around benefits are based on individuals circumstances relevant to their looking to find work, their various conditions.

“Even when someone is sanctioned then they can still get financial support through the Hardship Fund.

“And before people have their benefit sanctioned there will be a series of efforts to contact people by letter and by phone if they fail to attend an appointment.”

A lot more to that than meets the eye.

Of course. The usual Shock-Horror headlines.

I'm surprised you had to resort to a Mirror article, durhamjen! Didn't the Guardian report it?

I did not resort to a Mirror article. Because I signed the petition, his sister sent me an update, which had a link to the Mirror article.
I do not know if the Guardian reported it as I have not had time to read it over the last two days. These days I usually buy the i as my grandson, who I am teaching five days a week, will read the i. The Guardian is too much for him. He has autism.
Do you two actually care about anyone apart from yourselves?
Why do you have to sneer at everyone?

211,000+ did not agree with you. Neither did MPs who are going to have an enquiry into benefit sanctions after another www.change.org e-petition.

I'm sorry if I sneered. But I do think there are too many epetitions. And I was very puzzled about this case at the time. Why didn't the sister help him? Do we know why the poor man didn't inject his insulin? Was it down to depression? It wqs a very sad case, but I honestly think it is a bit rich for the sister to be blaming the government now.

When you are a diabetic, you inject insulin to counteract the carbohydrate that you eat. If he was not eating he probably thought he did not need his insulin.
He died of ketoacidosis which can happen within hours of not having food and insulin.

I wasn't sneering either.

But just criticising 'this government' for everything that's wrong with society isn't helpful, and the e-petitions started in various newspapers and online just encourage people to 'sign and resign' - i.e. they've done their bit by protesting and can pat themselves on the back for a job well done.

The fact that so many signatures means the issue has to be raised in parliament doesn't actually do anything other than clutter up debating time.

i too wonder at families who don't step in to help and then blame others.

You were sneering at me, Ana, for having to resort to a Mirror article.
What is parliament supposed to debate if it's not the systems it creates?

I wasn't 'sneering', durj, although I wonder whether you'd be so quick to endorse an e-petition sponsored by the DM.

And I am well aware of your circumstances. I think you have mentioned them before.

I don't only criticise the government for everything that's wrong in this country. I feel many of its population are as much to blame for what is going on because they just shrug their shoulders and let things happen.

I also mean people like those union members who seem to focus almost entirely on their own pay and conditions, students who turn up for demonstrations about tuition fees but pay other injustices little attention, pensioners who get all up in arms about their fuel allowances and bus passes but are otherwise perfectly happy to see other sections of the community targeted, etc. etc.

In the "I" today it is reported that a Freedom of Information request has revealed that a third of people with degenerative conditions are having their benefits cut because they have been assessed as likely to be able to work. Apparently almost 8,000 people suffering from multiple sclerosis, spinal muscular atrophy, Parkinson's disease, cystic fibrosis and rheumatoid arthritis have been assessed in this way. 5,000 of them were put into the category despite assessors reporting that they were unlikely to be able to work in the longer term. One such person was 57 and had multiple sclerosis. I should think it's difficult enough getting a job at the age of 57, even without MS. Luckily his MP managed to get the decision overturned. The LGBT group that supported the miners did so, not because the dispute affected them personally but because they felt that an injustice was being perpetrated against one section of the community and that all injustices should be resisted.

I don't understand why durhamjen's comments are treated with derision. She feels passionately about the way in which ordinary people are being treated and perhaps if more people were as bothered as she is we would have a much fairer society.

I think your first sentence Eloethan opens up a whole area for discussion. But it's not just those who have no interest in a certain area who 'shrug their shoulders and let things happen'.

Firstly individuals have to take responsibility for themselves. Where they are incapable of doing this them their families must step up to the mark, by helping older people, their student children, those with mental health problems and so on. Most of the people I know, and I'm guessing most of the people on this forum would step in to help their families without thinking twice about it, either with direct help or (if the problem was beyond them) calling in the requisite agencies to help.

Yes, some people do slip through the net. No system is infallible, but it does make me wonder why certain families who didn't step in to help are suddenly very proactive and vocal when it is too late.

I think most people on GN admire durhamjen's fight for social justice. But others too care about issues, and sometimes they are more complex than simply blaming 'the government'.

Eloethan has as usual provided clear, accurate information, for which thanks. Someone close to me, aged 63 who was retired on health grounds 8 years ago has recently been found fit to work. That's despite the Atos doctor reassuring her that the report would confirm she isn't fit for work. She has active rheumatoid arthritis, severe osteo arthritis and other auto immune problems. Her partner is terminally ill.

Her state pension would have kicked in at age 60, if her birthdate had been 8 weeks earlier. So she's supposed to sign on, and look for work. Yes, she could appeal the decision and I suspect she'd succeed. Like so many others in this situation, the stress involved is simply beyond her. The government claim that people who don't challenge these decisions, accept they are fit for work. It's like living in Wonderland

And this is where family or people 'close to' them need to step in and offer support to go through the appeal process, especially when they 'suspect she'd succeed'. I have recently gone through this with a relative who couldn't or wouldn't do it for herself and 'we' won the appeal. It wasn't that difficult especially with her GP and consultant on board.

Ask Soutra about appeals. Latest stats show 51% of ESA and 48% of DLA appeals result in a a decision in favour of the claimant.

Why should people have to appeal, Anya?
Why do we not expect the system to get it right in the first place?
Even the CAB has started a blog about the injustice. And it is this government that has done this to people who are least able to defend themselves. It's easy to say you can appeal, but the system has even cut legal aid for those wanting to appeal.
Some of you have said that the man who died could have had money through the hardship fund. That has to be paid back.
You also said his family could have helped. He was 59, out of the army, had been looking after his disabled mother, had worked until then. He had paid into the system and expected it to look after him until he found another job.
I know of three diabetics who lived on their own, and who died within 24 hours of last being seen by friends because of ketoacidosis.

I didn't say the system should get it right in the first place because that is a given DJ and I agree it should be better in the first place.

But what I am saying is that given the rulings and the fact that there is an appeal process then that is the next stage and friends and relatives should help when needed. No one can argue with that.

Re people with diabetes (I'd rather NOT tag them as diabetics) I have some experience of this too. Are you saying that they are 1) incapable of controlling their diabetes or 2) that somehow they are more at risk of DKA because they have insufficient money/benefits or other resources which put them at risk of developing this condition?

Re my last point I am NOT being in any way judgemental I'm just trying to establish in my own mind what point you are making, honestly

My husband did not mind being called a diabetic for 54 years.
What I was saying is that it isn't always possible to control. Any change in circumstances is difficult. Even having a cold can alter your state.

Anyway, I have been out shopping, and when I returned I looked at my emails and found this. Another example of e-petitions doing good.

https://www.change.org/p/kernow-ccg-please-bring-my-son-back-home-bringjoshhome-3

If someone is capable of deciding not to appeal, because they fear the stressful process may add to existing feelings of depression and anxiety, what kind of loving relative/friend would ignore their feelings and insist on them appealing? How can you "make" someone appeal something.

If you're talking about my post and my relative Iam64 then I find your attitude very odd. Some people can't face doing all the paperwork etc alone but with an offer of help they can. She's now got her benefits back whereas she'd have been struggling. Ever heard of 'tough love'?

I suppose you'd think it better just to leave them alone and let them fall victim to the system?

That's an angry response Anya. I posted earlier about someone close to me who couldn't face an appeal. I offered to support her, lead on this, but she simply couldn't face the process. That's the point I was making.

Yes, I've heard of tough love, and I imagine you have heard of the idea of respecting the expressed wishes and feelings of adults who are capable of making up their own minds about things. Even if you disagree with them

Then that was your friend's decision to make Iam and she must live with the consequences

The reason I sounded angry was because I put a lot of time and energy into this, most of it persuading someone to get off her backside and be proactive. To be honest I doubt I'd do it again.