Do we cause a level of disablement with the benefits system criteria firmly anchored in qualifying as unable to carry out activities with no scope for those who are able to overcome obstacles as we witnessed at this summers Paralympics.
Those who strive can face a financial penalty from a welfare system that rewards gold medals with removal of support in overlooking the achievement we confine expectations.
Taken in the lung health context an improvement gained at pulmonary rehabilitation has the inherent danger of removing benefit when qualifying criteria are no longer met.
The increased cost for the health service of forcing depreciation in health is counter productive surely an erroneous position when enablement has the potential for improving health as it reduces costs and demand on social services.
Force the sick into decreasing levels of ability or support striver's who refuse the comfort of an armchair embracing active healthy lives, I ask as a user of support are we as a nation making best use of the resources now and suggestions for bringing about improvement.