Do disability rights cost too much?

 
Activists protest against cuts To long-term health care in Washington DC Cuts in the US and UK threaten allowances for people with disabilities

The genesis of today's battle over Disability Living Allowance can be traced back to California in 1962 and a young man left severely disabled by polio.

Ed Roberts had applied to the state's university at Berkeley where one of the deans famously said: "we've tried cripples before and it doesn't work".

But Ed won his place and found himself on the front line of the civil rights protest movement. Amid sit-ins and demos, he asserted that disabled students had the right to full access to university life. His campaigning led to the first Center for Independent Living being founded at Berkeley - a project that became a model for disability rights the world over.

The philosophy was that those with physical disabilities should enjoy the same freedom, choice, dignity and control that able-bodied individuals take for granted. And that the state had a duty to ensure those rights were respected.

Who was Ed Roberts?

Ed Roberts in 1994, photo courtesy Disability Rights Education & Defense Fund
  • Born 1939, died 1995
  • Contracted polio aged 14 - just two years before Salk vaccine which ended epidemics
  • First student with severe disabilities to attend Berkeley
  • Studied political science, earning BA in 1964 and MA in 1966, then taught at Berkeley
  • Pioneer of independent living movement for people with disabilities and special needs

It was a campaign that struck a chord in Britain. In the early 1980s a group of disabled people from the UK went to Berkeley seeking support and inspiration, among them Vic Finkelstein, an activist who had cut his teeth in the anti-apartheid movement. He returned to help adapt the American independent living model to Britain's welfare state.

There were some early wins. One group in Hampshire and another in Derbyshire convinced their local councils that rather than pay an institution to look after them, funds should be made available for them to live in their own homes.

The Independent Living activists had started a movement and, when in 1986 Margaret Thatcher's government withdrew a benefit which had supported disabled people in their own homes, a furious campaign was mobilised.

Unsure how to respond to wheelchair protests, within a year the Department of Social Security had backed down, replacing the old benefit with an Independent Living Fund which became the foundation for the Disability Living Allowance, or DLA.

However, ministers and officials in the Treasury were growing anxious. They could see where this might lead and the potential bill attached. Health Minister Virginia Bottomley sent out a circular saying that council-funded independent living schemes were illegal under the 1948 Social Security Act.

A now well-organised disability rights campaign swung into action and managed to get the law changed allowing direct payment.

A new millennium and New Labour saw a further shift - rather than merely permitting English councils to fund independent living, it became mandatory based on individual need. Disability Living Allowance was not means tested or only for the unemployed - the crowning achievement of the Independent Living Movement.

Margaret Thatcher with wheelchair-bound veterans, 1982 Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher met injured veterans of the Falklands war in 1982

Disability rights are now enshrined within a Council of Europe Action Plan.

Britain is also a signatory to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which states that disabled people should live where they wish and with whom they wish. Taxpayers pick up the tab.

All of this was largely uncontentious in years of plenty, but austerity has brought with it demands that the welfare state be cut back. DLA costs billions and the Treasury is committed to finding an alternative that will see the rising bill reduced by a whopping 20%.

No wonder there is such concern among disability campaigners. A struggle for rights which began half a century ago is threatening to go into reverse.

 
Mark Easton, Home editor Article written by Mark Easton Mark Easton Home editor

More on This Story

Related Stories

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external Internet sites

Comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +30

    Comment number 1.

    The government is going after the disabled because their easy, a minority group. Its why child benefit will never be 'means tested',

    In the end the dreadful stories will start of people losing out, the hell their lives become - new bureaucracy will be announced and costs will spiral beyond that saved and these reforms will be ended, but not after people are put through unnecessary hell.

  • rate this
    +39

    Comment number 2.

    Yet again we rely on The Lords to act as the conscience of the nation.

    The Government's attempt to rescind the assumption of National Insurance payments for those disabled since birth who could never work is an act of unconscionable cruelty.

    Polly Toynbee was right - David Cameron is going to find out the British people are simply not as nasty as him.

  • rate this
    +19

    Comment number 3.

    This government has of course worked out that the easiest folk to get after are the sick and especially the disabled,never mind the real work shy and huge tax dodgers,they will always come last with out politicians.
    Protect terroists and the like,yes,thats ok BUT genuinely help and stop harassing disabled people aah,thats another matter.

  • rate this
    +33

    Comment number 4.

    MY brother is disabled and i share a house with him. He gets very little money as it is and the council do anything they can to get away with not paying him. Every year while he is assessed he loses 2 weeks benefits. They even tried to suggest he didn't need them because they saw my name on some of the bills (we split bills 50/50).

    And the tories want to make it worse for him? It makes me sick,

  • rate this
    +26

    Comment number 5.

    Targetting of the genuinely disabled for benefit cuts is absolutely disgusting. These people are the most vulnerable in our society and the stress alone of having to justify their benefit will be too much for some. It should be sufficient to take the word of their Hospital specialist without having to subject them to assessments.

 

Comments 5 of 162

 

This entry is now closed for comments

Features & Analysis

Elsewhere on BBC News

  • Pulling a pint in MauritiusThe beer hunter

    One man's quest to bring artisan beer to the island of Mauritius

Programmes

  • Traffic lightsClick Watch

    From hacking cars to traffic lights - behind the scenes at a cyber-security conference

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.