Expanding the welfare state


by D.J. Webb

 don’t have time for a long post, but I was surprised to read today that the welfare state is expanding, not being scaled back, and that people who care for elderly and disabled relatives will gain the legal right to “time off”, with councils required by law to provide stand-ins for them. See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/elderhealth/9320910/Carers-to-be-given-respite-holidays.html for a news report.

I am sure caring is a burden and that people who care for others are deserving of admiration, but it is the wrong thing to do, especially in a financial crisis, to be expanding the welfare state. This can only push up council tax bills.

The state should not be trying to unpick the web of obligations that bind family members. Those ties should not become ties to the state instead. Family life should not be interfered in by the state, and the state should not seek to become another arm of the family. This is wrong in every possible way.

We ought to be trying to build on existing family obligations to withdraw existing state provision. At the moment, policies that encourage family breakup have led to the situation where many people have no family to turn to. We need to encourage the family once again – libertarians who believe there is no need for family values and morality are in fact propagandising for state intervention – and force families to support their relatives.

However burdensome it is to care for relatives, it is really a private problem. I regard it as nothing short of fraud for carers to seek government intervention to provide them with “holidays”, holidays from obligations that the state has no right to weaken or abrogate.

Along with other wrongheaded social policies, this policy will embed itself in society and become difficult or impossible to change in the future. People will become used to the state being the family carer, and will start screaming about uncaring policies if they are ever asked to do their own family duties once again.

That report also says that the government expects many more adults to be forced to care for relatives in the future as society ages. All the more reason not to open up area of the welfare state for vested interests to colonise.

About these ads

3 responses to “Expanding the welfare state

  1. Hi,
    I am not sure how in my particular case I would be expanding the benefits scam although I would welcome the change in the law.I have never qualified for any benefits as I work full time which alleviate my suffering and helps my sanity,but I would welcome a break as I ahve had no holiday for 6 years since the wife became very ill.
    We are struggling to survive as she is emaciated and needs the heatin on continuously.
    We fell victims to Tony Blair’s and his visionary Blunkett’s Criminal Justice Act and alleged racially aggravated harrassment.The accusers were virtaully all black miliking the benefits system with multiple kids for unmarried mothers.We were assaulted and suffered vile abuse to provoke us to retaliate and then hope to film and record the incident.The evidence was fabricated using community police and presnted to London Borough of Merton to evict us free of charge using Legal Services.Injunctions were served evicting us and banning me from 200-400 metres of my own homemMy wife collapsed and overdosed and has been suffering anorexia for 6 years and now weighs 5 stone.I have cared for her with her father.My wife pleaded with me to stay and the neighbours called the police when I broke the injunctions to look after her.10 poice battered the door down in my face concussing me and 3 officers thew me into the kitchen wher I was beated with the asp 3 times and kicked and punched mercilessly prostrate on the floor while their women colleagues giggled.I was jailed for 4 days and charged.I had to fund my defence at 6000 pounds and was aquitted by the magistrate.I was arreasted again for allegedly abusing the same neighbour in 2008 that had attempted to orchestrate our eviction in 2006 using the same method and police officer and given a committal order to prison.
    After nearly 60 years without a blemish to my nam I was awarded costs of 6000 pounds against London Borough of Merton.My wife is subject to 2 eviction orders and is represented by the Official Solicitor and because of her frailty the process is frozen.
    I really am at my wits end as I have had to take over sole care for her and I really do need some help,but I am affraid to ask the Local Authoriy as there have been numerous attempts to section her in the past.

  2. Stan, your race relations problem is really a separate issue. You said, “I really am at my wits end as I have had to take over sole care for her and I really do need some help”, but you are your wife’s husband, not the state. She is YOUR responsibility. This is the meaning of “in sickness and in health”.

  3. C H Ingoldby

    It gives renewed meaning to the term ‘nanny State’. The State is intruding into the personal, family sphere. Ever growing, replacing natural relationships.

    This is insidious and dangerous. And anyone who opposes it can easily be made to look uncaring and cruel.