Letters

Dear Editor,

My wife, Jenny, is 51 and suffers from severe Rheumatoid Arthritis and I am her carer. We receive S.D.A., D.L.A, I.C.A. and Income Support and have done for many years. We recently applied to remortgage our house. The company involved would not even consider our application on the grounds that the benefits were not guaranteed income, they felt the government could change policy on benefits in the future and implied we would be left without the means to meet the repayments. Jenny's disablement is a permanent thing. I can obtain written confirmation of this from her G.P. and the specialist she sees at the hospital.

If this or any other government did withdraw any of the disabled benefits, surely they would be replaced by others at least their equal if not better? Would I be right in thinking the State has duty to care financially for people in our position, particularly in view of the Human Rights Act?

I intend to fight the company involved to get them to change their minds as I feel they are discriminating against us purely on the grounds of Jenny's disability.

I would welcome your views on this matter as a matter of some urgency.

Name supplied

Dear Editor,

I am a disabled woman and single parent, having recently given birth to a daughter. Following her birth, I received the standard visit from the Benefits Agency on behalf of the Child Support Agency. I was told that if I did not supply the name of my child's father (so that they could contact him for maintenance payments) then my income support would be cut substantially.

As my child was conceived through a private donor arrangement and the man is not involved in her upbringing, I cannot give this information. However, a welfare benefits worker has found a loophole which means that, as a disabled person, my benefits cannot be reduced.

In the hope that others (disabled adults or parents of a disabled child) might benefit too, here is the information, quoted from the Welfare Benefits Handbook (Child Poverty Action Group):

"When deciding whether to make a 'reduced benefits direction', the Benefits Agency must consider whether the welfare of the child would be adversely affected, for example, because of her/his age or state of health, or that of her/his parents.... A reduced benefit direction cannot be issued if IS [income support] or JSA [job seeker's allowance] paid to you or your partner includes a disabled child premium, a disability premium or a higher pensioner premium."

Name supplied

Dear Editor,

Will the Government relax cannabis laws? The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, states there are plans to reclassify the drug, will this help people who want to use this drug for health reasons? Would their time on this earth be pain free? Would those who wish to use the drug for other purposes “slip through the net”? Should the law remain intact and the drug stay a Class B?

I think that despite all the campaigning, and the people who are in pain (physical and mental), shouting for the cannabis law to be altered, the law should remain unchanged.

I am in chronic pain due to illness. It eats away at me, changing throughout the day. Sometimes I cry, sometimes I get angry, sometimes I get depressed. But like so many others I try alternative medicine and therapies, swimming, exercise, meditation. There are so many legal things to try without giving in to illegal substances. Don’t let yourself and others down. Don’t encourage young, vulnerable people to take cannabis. Be strong when all around you are weak.

Life isn’t easy, and, yes, life is a battle, a battle that has to be won, won without blood shed. Let the New Year be a new beginning, a time to search and find new hope, hope for a cure, not a hope to break the law and leave little children vulnerable. Lead by example I say - What say you?

Mrs Stanton