Benefits?

[Kay]

I was told by a neighbour today that an alchoholic can actually claim benefits. Could any AB'rs confirm this as I cant believe it!  Thanks.

[silly moo]

Just wondering why being an alcoholic should mean you didn't have the same rights as everybody else.

[boobesque]

alcoholism is a disease, so i would imagine holding down a job is hard, my soon to be ex husband certainly found it hard, a lot of them need help to get themselves sorted. if they cant work what should we do, let them starve? loose thier homes and possibly become another homeless person so many of us seem to be disgusted by (not myself as i have been homeless and slept rough) they have the same rights as others.

[THECORBYLOON]

Anyone 16 or over and incapable of work, including alcoholics and drug addicts, can claim Incapacity Benefit and may also qualify for Income Support. Although some may consider these conditions are self-inflicted they are stll classed as incapacities.

[hinge1967]

When claiming Disability LIving Allowance benefit in the UK what is tested is the extent you can care for yourself and how mobile you are. The nature of the diasabling condition is less important, although a professional opinion is needed to offer information on prognosis.

I think its only right (and far less judgemental!) that each case is judged on its own merits rather than on a condition. It's not the case that an alcholic can automatically get money, but neither can a quadriplegic! In fact the only automatic entitlement is for those who have a terminal illness under special rules.

[Sammy Snake]

The thing that annoys me more than anything is that they then spend all threr benfits on buying more alcohol and they still end up losing their homes and starving!

I understand that alcoholism is a disease but in that case surely they need treatment for the disease like anyone else and none of the alcoholics I've come across ever seem to get it.

[hinge1967]

Alcoholism is a disease with strong elements of responsibility attached to it but alchohol alters brain chemistry and interferes with peoples abilities to make good decisions about themselves. Along with the disease factors goes the denial shame and humilation that goes with having to be dependedent on drink.

The treatment is dependent on lots of things, and the first of those is the requirement of the alcholic to recognise they have a problem. This is the hardest thing to do because that means acknowledging that you have lost control of yourself and your life. Imagine the loss of self worth, the shame anfd the degredation you have to put yourself through in order tyo stop being dependent - after all there are people who believe alcoholics should not get benefits and know that they spend all their benefits on buying more alcohol and lose their homes and end up starving.

If I were an alcoholic, I think I would have more chance of accepting treatment effectively if I lived in a more tolerant and less judgemental world. Then perhaps it would be safer to admit my problem, knowing that I would be supported and not victimised for having the courage to admit the problem.

[undercovers]

yeah but it does seem strange that the council (or who ever) would judge someone to be an alcoholic and then provide the means and the time without work to really get themselves into trouble through drinking - surely if we are concerned about peoples emotional and physical well being we shouldn'y marginalise alcoholics by allowing them to hide away on benefits drinking themselves to an early grave. They should be offered assistance to find work and counciling to fight the addiction but not the freedom to kill themselves alone and without any help from society other than housing and incapacity benefits... so in conclusion they do get benefits but shouldn't we all need to think twice about what we are going to "help" these people - in your post you say its a disease, but you them imply that this means we can't do anything to stop it - if its a disease lets treat it rather than just let it run its course!

[Kay]

Thanks to you all for replying to my question. I dont understand how "Alcholism" is classed as a disease,surely its an addiction in which case if say, a smoker cant give up the fags he/she can claim benefits too? What about patients who are trying to withdraw from prescribed drugs which were hailed as "Non Addictive" Through no fault of their own they're now addicts but would never call themselves "Diseased".I admit AA do a good job for many alco's but the majority just feed from the likes of the hardworking just like the illegal drug addicts!!!!!

[hinge1967]

FINA. Just to remind you that you cannot get benefits for being an alcoholic. You get benefit, if you do not have a job, you are unable to get a job due to ill-health, or you are disabled in such a way that you need assitance to care for yourself or get around.

On the separate issue of alcoholism you are right to question the disease model, some people believe it and some don't. There's a suggestion that genetics is involved since it runs in some families but nothing proven. There's no doubt that alcohol in excess causes disabling disease. Acoholism fits a disease model which is that once the diagnosis is made then treatment can begin. Like all diseases it cannot be treated without consent, so the diagnosis has to be accepted by the individual.

The difficult issue is that because this disease is (superficially) self inflicted its possible to blame the individual. After all they choose to drink. For debates sake, does the state have any obligation to (for example) a motorcyclist who crashes and ends up unable to walk? Or a diabetic who doesn't control their diet? Or someone who has a heart attack and continues to eat chips? Or someone who choses quality of life over chemotherapy?

[kev1]

A doctor once told me that if you have a heroin addict and an alcoholic the odds are far better curing the heroin addict than the alcoholic.

I'm not either by the way I used to work in the alcohol and drug abuse clinic