I want to work too, but the problem with the system all along, as one who has experienced it's
downside is that the focus is always on the disabled person who after attending some incompetently
administerd course is then considered work ready, never mind the facts that employer prejudice is
still going to prevent work.
Anti Discrimination legislation is not the answer either, because you have to effectively be in work
to prove a case, impossible to prove when you are just another rejected candidate.
As for the situation when job descriptions effectively render anyone on the autistic spectrum
persona non grata, as "good commication skills" and "team player" are almost a mirror of the
construction of two of the "triad of impairments"
What chance?
The government will rail on about all how the private sector will be providing opportunities, it is
bull.
It will kill people, it will render people homeless, destitute and further than ever down the
economic ladder of opportunity.
In such an atmosphere crime will flourish and worse, it is the economic hopelessness in places like
Gaza and post War Iraq that leads to an upsurge in the economic value of the martyr in the
community.
http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/faculty/harrison/comment/guardian.pdf
Larry
> -----Original Message-----
> From: The Disability-Research Discussion List
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Axel Kaehne
> Sent: 23 July 2008 14:06
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: benefits shakeup
>
> Hi there,
>
> not sure if your criticism is that spot on, given that the
> reforms have just been announced in a green paper and still
> have to go through consultation. Also the benefits system in
> the UK is quite different from the one in the US. So why not
> wait and see what it looks like once the legislation is on
> the table in its final shape?
>
> Just one point certainly is worth highlighting. Your critique
> assumes that there is going to be a push to get people off
> benefit at all costs. Well, it seems to me to be the other
> way round. Time and time again i speak to young people with
> learning disabilities who actually WANT to work but the
> benefits advisors temper their enthusiasm to say the least.
> So far the government wanted them NOT to work, now, with the
> new green paper, perhaps the emphasis has shifted and that
> may give people with disabilities a chance to hold the
> government to their promises. So, let's see and wait...
>
> As for learning from the US, well the figures for employment
> of people for learning disabilities are simply better than
> the comparable figures for the UK. that should be a good
> enough reason to look what they are doing right, shouldnt it?
>
> Axel
>
>
>
> >>> Mitzi Waltz <[log in to unmask]> 23/07/08 12:52 PM >>>
> I can't help but shake my head at the UK government's
> insistence on believing that the "Wisconsin experiment"
> actually resulted in great outcomes--other than the obvious
> one of saving the state loads of money and to some extent
> proving a compliant workforce for fast food restaurants,
> nursing homes and other low-level employers, who have
> actually been its greatest beneficiaries.
> Here are just a few of its unintended consequences:
> * Low-level jobs in local and state government that had been
> within the reach of working class people (i.e., garbage
> collection, file clerking, laundry room work) now being done
> by workfare recipients for pennies on the dollar. Result:
> people who had been working at a stable job out of work,
> people who had been on benefits still on benefits but working
> to get them.
> * People being pushed from benefits into a workplace that
> doesn't actually offer stable full-time employment, and
> therefore working two or three part-time jobs to get by.
> Result: Income insecurity, children being left home alone or
> in cars while parents work as they can't pay for day care on
> unreliable wages, people on and off benefits, in and out of
> housing, worsening mental and physical health.
> * harsh sanctions applied to people with disabilities/parents
> caring for disabled children to "motivate" them--in the US,
> several states remove benefits for children when the parent
> misses an appointment, leaving the entire family destitute.
> Result: child endangerment, health endangerment, increased
> hunger and homelessness, people turning to prostitution or
> theft to survive.
> And there are many more. It's not like these things aren't
> known--since the "Wisconsin experiment" has been rolled out
> across the US over the past several years there have been
> multiple studies done showing abuses and unintended
> consequences. It's important to note as well that Wisconsin
> was originally dealing with a rather different population
> than the UK (or most US states): AFDC (now TANF) recipients
> were primarily single parents, not "jobseekers" in the UK
> sense, or people receiving benefit because of their
> disability (many TANF recipients have disabilities or care
> for disabled children, of course--and this is the population
> that every study has shown the "reforms" cause worsening
> outcomes for!).
> For a flavour of what you may expect, please see:
> http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/publications/2003/familysupports.htm
>
> BTW, my family has had recent experience of the US benefits "system,"
> such as it is, and it has been truly painful. My daughter was
> on TANF for two years (her lifetime limit!) and the mandatory
> classes were intrusive in the extreme. Recipients were
> required to discuss past experiences of substance abuse,
> physical and sexual abuse, etc in a public forum with
> strangers--very intimidating and unpleasant under any
> circumstances--then hear their accounts "judged" in public a
> la Trisha by uneducated, nasty caseworkers. And that was just
> the introductory sessions. You were shamed for being
> unmarried, for having had sex, for being poor. There was a
> nasty racial tinge to a lot of it. If you attended one-to-one
> counselling sessions, what you said "in confidence"
> was shared with the people who decided whether you got
> benefits. They had no understanding at all of mental ill
> health, or of what community support was required for single
> mothers to work. Recipients were told that they had to take
> any job on offer, regardless of whether it offered health
> insurance or could be reached via public transport,
> regardless of whether child care was available during the
> hours given. Many of the jobs on offer were shift work or
> things like night janitor, night nurse aide or security
> guard. My daughter managed to dodge this (she's a smart
> cookie, and my own experience as a "welfare mother" back in
> the Reagan years still came in handy in helping her work the
> system) but she knows for certain that of those in her group
> who were forced to take night jobs, their children were being
> left at home alone or with "boyfriends"--and I don't need to
> spell out the dangers of either option--unless the lass was
> lucky enough to have a mother or grandmother handy.
>
> Why is it that the UK government still seems to think that
> "it comes from America" is a point in anything's favour,
> whether it's welfare reform or privatising IT systems? Arrrgh...
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the
> Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to
> this web page.
>
> ________________End of message________________
>
> This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the
> Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds
> (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
> Enquiries about list administration should be sent to
> [log in to unmask]
>
> Archives and tools are located at:
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to
> this web page.
>
>
________________End of message________________
This Disability-Research Discussion list is managed by the Centre for Disability Studies at the University of Leeds (www.leeds.ac.uk/disability-studies).
Enquiries about list administration should be sent to [log in to unmask]
Archives and tools are located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can VIEW, POST, JOIN and LEAVE the list by logging in to this web page.
|
