From a
press release issued by Kent University in England:
Misleading news coverage, driven mostly by the policy process, is
preventing thousands of people in need from claiming vital welfare
benefits, according to a new report by University researchers on behalf
of the charity Turn2us.
The report, titled Benefits Stigma in Britain, reveals that one in
four eligible people had either delayed claiming or refused to do so
completely due to the perceived stigma attached to applying for state
support. ...
The research, which included an analysis of media coverage since
1995, shows that disproportionate coverage of fraud and misleading news
stories are linked to rising stigma, with people who read more
stigmatising newspapers perceiving higher levels of deception and
demonstrating more reluctance to claim, even when they are experiencing
abject need.
Dr Baumberg said: ‘The study also highlights a discernible shift in
public attitudes, with claimants seen as less deserving than they were
20 years ago, when the fraud and scrounger rhetoric really started to
take hold in media discourse. Looking at trends over time, non-take-up
of benefits has risen concurrently with stigma. ...
Rob Tolan, Head of Policy at Turn2us, said: ‘At a human level, stigma
is resulting in thousands of elderly, sick and disabled people skipping
meals or keeping the heating off, lest they be tarred with the
“scrounger” brush. One lady we helped, who was left disabled by a brain
tumour, ate porridge five nights a week, rather than ask for help. ...
The research found that only 15% of people think that they would be treated with respect when making a claim for benefits. ...
2 comments:
It saddens me to read transcripts of hearings and see social security disability applicants treated as criminal defendants in the UNITED STATES!
It's already a nonadversarial proceeding, what more do you want? Should we just take everything they say at face value and not bother following up on questionable (or obviously false) statements?
Give me a break--claimants (and reps, for that matter) are treated so beyond kindly and fairly it is ridiculous to lament their treatment. We are repeatedly told to soften our language in decisions and questioning (even if the claimant out and out lied, the harshest word we are supposed to use is "inconsistency." Even if they perpetrated tax fraud, we can't say that and can't even say more than "inconsistency" between earnings and reported work activity).
I am so very progressive, but now that I've worked at SSA for a few years, I can honestly say treatment by ALJs is some of the friendliest, easiest there is as far as legal proceedings go. Go to any other court, state or federal, for proceedings that are similar (guardianship stuff, custody stuff, other legal things where litigants are involved in sensitive things requiring sensitive treatment). You'll find attorneys getting dressed down for shenanigans we regularly tolerate as business as usual. You'll find claimant's losing rights due to failure to appear, late filing, improper decorum, etc. etc.
There are legitimate gripes about waits, needless red tape, etc., but to say claimants are treated badly...good lord, it's as easy as it can be short of just giving benefits to all who apply.
Post a Comment