Disability benefits: why we shouldn’t call it ‘welfare’ | Letters

Disability benefits: why we shouldn’t call it ‘welfare’ | Letters. Susan Randall on Stephen Timms’ Pip review and those with longstanding mental illness and Ruth Lister on why social security spending shouldn’t be called ‘welfare’.

A apuração publicada por www.theguardian.com vira base para uma leitura editorial direta e contextualizada.

Trechos de apoio da pauta: Susan Randall on Stephen Timms’ Pip review and those with longstanding mental illness and Ruth Lister on why social security spending shouldn’t be called ‘welfare’. Plus letters from Luke Howard and Katie MeddWith reference to your editorial (The Guardian view on disability benefits: Pip must not become another route for cuts, 10 July), and speaking as someone who has contributed to Sir Stephen Timms’ review on behalf of family carers dealing with those with serious mental illnesses, such as schizophrenia, I fully support a substantial revision of the whole approach to personal independence payment (Pip) assessment.The assessment process is currently a daunting one for those who are justifiably applying for this much‑needed support.

• Ponto de atenção: disability.
• Ponto de atenção: benefits.
• Ponto de atenção: shouldn.

Em resumo, a leitura editorial acompanha o impacto do tema no nicho Beleza.