Benefits: a clear distinction needed

WELL done, Mr Bill Geddes, for writing in defence of people who are forced to survive (and I do mean “survive” not “live”) on benefits through no fault of their own.

A clear distinction must be made between those benefits which claimants, who are undoubtedly using the system to their advantage and could, perhaps, undertake some form of paid employment but choose not to, and those who are unable to work for certified medical reasons.

My son, who has MS, and his wife, who has a painful and debilitating condition called hypermobility syndrome, are at this moment worried to death about the changes to the benefits system and how badly they will be affected by them.

They have both held down part-time jobs with permission from their medical advisers (being unable to work full-time or do anything involving heavy physical work owing to the unpredictable nature of their illnesses), but are now unable to work because of lack of mobility and/or pain.

Perhaps Mr Hart and others of his ilk should try living with a chronic, painful, progressive disease for which there is currently no cure and with little or no effective pain relief, before making uneducated comments about people who would like nothing better than to be able to work to support themselves, but who, sadly, have no choice but to rely on the benefits system.

Judith Wilson

Willow Crescent