Comment on Disabled people are trying to tell us how benefits system is killing them. It’s time we listened.
DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 year agoI also thought there would be specific examples leading to concluding paragraph.
The article is about a timeline of events, which is linked at the bottom, as well as many other links in the body of the article that lead to much more info and examples, I'm not sure what more they could have done.
As for your anecdote, I can second it, since I had a similar thing happen to me (moved to a new area, had my benefits stopped while they re-assessed me in the new area). This happens due to privatisation and a breaking up of the system so that each area is managed by a different contractor, and they don't really communicate (since none are designed to give the claimant the best outcome, so why would they). I knew my benefits had been stopped and it still took a little over a year to get everything going again (with significant support).
Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
The timeline, behind a five-click-introduction that explains and teaches you about the structure of the timeline itself, is an impersonal wiki list of bureaucratic events that led to a poorly run and maintained welfare system, it is a dry read on a cluttered page.
The article could easily include a couple stories to show people reading the article how the poorly run system is affecting real people.
DessertStorms@kbin.social 1 year ago
As much as your comment pisses me off, it does have some value, in proving the title perfectly accurate - people need to start listening to disabled people more, because this is obviously an issue for many of you.
The article did include a couple of stories, you just didn't care enough to click through to the examples (or to read a shock horror short introduction to the literal information you are demanding).
And since you clearly don't give enough of a shit to make the effort, neither will I, have a copy pasta and go on with your life of wilful ignorance:
you could have clicked more than one link in the article, and reached this("people’s deaths"), which links to:
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-disability-benefits-claimants-fail-whistleblowers/
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-disability-benefits-assessors-pressure-ramp-up-numbers/
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/legacy-benefits-claimant-astonished-judge-justified-discrimination/
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-cut-back-my-disability-benefits-feared-homelessness/
All of which contain many other links, and also:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/esa-outcomes-of-work-capability-assessments-including-mandatory-reconsiderations-and-appeals-december-2022/esa-work-capability-assessments-mandatory-reconsiderations-and-appeals-december-2022
Or this("contractors")
which links to:
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-disability-benefits-assessments-pip-westminster-debate/
https://www.bigissue.com/news/social-justice/dwp-refused-pip-deducted-universal-credit/
Never mind the timeline the entire article about, which, if you scroll, will provide you with relevant links and information about individual deaths as well as the big picture
https://deathsbywelfare.org/timeline/#mps-refuse-to-question-minister-over-deaths-by-welfare-timeline
All you had to do was give the tiniest of shits, the information is all there.
Varyk@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
My comment has value because of what we know about how people read articles and engage with causes.
If you just want to write a diary, then you can structure it however you like.
If, however, your intention is to raise awareness of a situation or minority, then it behooves you to make it as engaging as it is credibly informative and comprehensive for as wide as audience as possible. If you are actually trying to raise awareness through an article, all of those elements must be satisfied.
This short article contains thirteen links, many of which lead to statistics or bureaucratic processes.
Trying to raise awareness by obligating the reader, who may be learning about this for the first time, to click literally over a dozen links that require further clickthroughs is not going to help engagement with the article or raise awareness and support as much as you apparently think it is.
Neither is being insulting or making assumptions based on your own misapprehension of my comment.