| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Disability benefits article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Cheating the public out of their benefits Information
There needs to be sections or one main section detailing the numerous ways the state and subcontractors prevent the public from getting what they're entitled to, either by incompetence or outright deception. Here are some quick links to give a rough idea of the situation.
For jobseekers allowance http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/08/jobcentres-benefits-sanctions-targets
For poor medicals from 2002 and 2010.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/apr/10/disability.socialcare?INTCMP=SRCH
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/29/incapacity-benefit-failing?
Subcontractor issues. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/welfaretowork-firm-a4e-knew-of-fraud-risk-in-2009-7582786.html
Pleasetry ( talk) 23:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Withdrawn as little chance of a consensus in the affirmative. ItsPugle ( talk) 11:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Disability benefits →
Disability payments – This article exclusively discusses financial payments, not other supports given, as the article suggests. On an ethical note, the term "benefit" suggests there's something to be gained from aquiring a disability or an intentional reason to purposefully subject oneself to a disability - this indirectly could support prejudice or hostility against those with disabilities, as it could be seen as questioning the legitimacy or nature of disabilities.
ItsPugle (
talk)
12:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - it is way more common to use the current title than the proposed title. See [1]. Interstellarity ( talk) 14:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. I think the current title is the more common name. Rreagan007 ( talk) 19:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Disability benefits article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
|
| This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
Cheating the public out of their benefits Information
There needs to be sections or one main section detailing the numerous ways the state and subcontractors prevent the public from getting what they're entitled to, either by incompetence or outright deception. Here are some quick links to give a rough idea of the situation.
For jobseekers allowance http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/08/jobcentres-benefits-sanctions-targets
For poor medicals from 2002 and 2010.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2002/apr/10/disability.socialcare?INTCMP=SRCH
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/29/incapacity-benefit-failing?
Subcontractor issues. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/welfaretowork-firm-a4e-knew-of-fraud-risk-in-2009-7582786.html
Pleasetry ( talk) 23:47, 3 June 2012 (UTC)
- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The result of the move request was: Withdrawn as little chance of a consensus in the affirmative. ItsPugle ( talk) 11:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Disability benefits →
Disability payments – This article exclusively discusses financial payments, not other supports given, as the article suggests. On an ethical note, the term "benefit" suggests there's something to be gained from aquiring a disability or an intentional reason to purposefully subject oneself to a disability - this indirectly could support prejudice or hostility against those with disabilities, as it could be seen as questioning the legitimacy or nature of disabilities.
ItsPugle (
talk)
12:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose - it is way more common to use the current title than the proposed title. See [1]. Interstellarity ( talk) 14:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- Oppose. I think the current title is the more common name. Rreagan007 ( talk) 19:51, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
- The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.