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.

20 Replies

  • Better translation software required the use of prior to understanding the meaning of.


  • I do so agree (sorry split infinitive)

    Tina x

  • Forgiven - I count myself among those who use it , oft-times to ex- bloody-tremes

    Chris xx

  • That did have me giggling

  • Oh yes, the thesaurus must have tasted good, the sentiment was in the right place (I think.)

  • split infinitive sounds painful is there no cure ?

  • Sorry, this is a no hope condition, so we must continue to boldly go. Te He :)

  • Trekking into infinity and beyond :-)

  • Are we all going to Jupitor/Neptune again?

  • We already there as far as the goverment is concerned

  • Share any thoughts on welfare system Homerbreeze.

  • I do not believe,we are.The entire health and benifit system,req a complete overhaul,,,i do not think any goverment,,will have the willpower or stamina.

  • I fully agree the nature of this overhaul from those at the coal face as such will have a much greater comprehension of the issues than a quango or think tank.

    Also in agreement on willpower and stamina though this should not blinker our thinking on the welfare system that carries out the functions required by users at a sustainable cost for the nation.

    Far more positive considering options for improvement than weeping over the provision of inadequate support that is provided.

  • Find me a government with the political willpower for more than cost cutting then we can talk about welfare reform in a positive discussion and not before that "qualifying criteria" is reached.

  • Holding no discussion until conditions are as you wish is a futile exercise that wastes valuable time and resources awaiting perfect conditions.

    Consider what are we doing which moves the debate on from the position we find ourselves an active not passive role in welfare reform.

  • Praising the competitors at the Paralympics while sending them for job centre meetings shows the true colours of the reform taking place double standards are applied between the media portrayal and the reality of claiming support.

  • Dissenting from the reform taking shape should not be confused with positive action necessary in reshaping a welfare system conceived in the last century under vastly different conditions than the ones now faced.

  • One of the things I find most annoying about these "welfare Reforms "is that this coalition government is telling us that they are doing this for our own good.

    This is the way they will get disabled people into work,is the lie they repeat over and over again ,it's nothing to do with reducing the welfare bill,or even heaven forbid the tory ideology that only those who do the right thing and work hard are worth supporting.

    Multi millionaires will be getting a £200 a week tax rebate from next week ,some one US are the ones who are paying them.

  • There are many issues in dire need of revision the question of funding distinguishes fine words from intention, no right minded individual can consider cutting support brings anything other than deterioration of that support.

    My intention was establishing an alternative idiom from the interested service users holding their needs at the core, centralizing aspirations alongside a viable delivery system.

    As sufferers from lung conditions do we whine about fate or take action in reshaping the future I am in favour of the latter though I welcome all contributions.

  • I was going to leave a comment but I know when I am outgunned. ......skulks off to corner and hides.

You may also like...