Statements against Welfare Reform Bill

* Letter from a breastfeeding mother on income support who is being compelled to attend work-focussed interviews
* Statement by Sheila Kitzinger, breastfeeding campaigner and writer
* Statement from the mother of a child with a disability
* Woman with mental health problems hounded by Jobcentre staff
* Child clinical psychologist OLIVER JAMES on the Welfare Reform Bill
requirements that parents of young children take on waged work.
* From a mother who fled domestic violence

LETTER FROM A BREASTFEEDING MOTHER ON INCOME SUPPORT WHO IS BEING COMPELLED TO ATTEND WORK-FOCUSED INTERVIEWS.

17 June 2009

I am writing to protest the degrading way in which motherhood is being treated by government benefits agencies and other private subcontracted agencies.

As a mother on Income Support with an 11-month-old son, I am being forced to attend a compulsory ‘Work Focused Group Information Session’ with up to 15 other single mothers this Friday morning at 9.45 am, 19 June. If I don’t go I face losing my benefits. The purpose stated is to: ‘help you consider going into paid work and to identify the help and support available to you to do this.’ The letter from the Jobcenterplus informing me of this stressed that they will not ‘be able to discuss any benefit enquiries’. The letter also told me ‘to make alternative childcare arrangements’, without saying if the agency would pay. And the venue is not even local, involving an hour’s travel each way.

I am still breastfeeding. My son is very active and only just learning to walk. Whilst he does eat some solids, 80-90% of his food intake is still breastmilk, about half of which is consumed in the mornings between 6am to noon. He is thriving on it. 

Because I would rather not disrupt his eating pattern at this stage, I called the agency to change the time of the Session. I was told there was no flexibility, only the date could be changed. I was then informed there is a crèche on the premises. Because my son feeds on and off, particularly in the morning, this is unlikely to be of much use to me. He is unlikely to stay in the crèche anyway, so I will have to keep him with me, which will be disruptive to the group. Even if he doesn’t want to feed at this time on this day, I know nothing about the crèche on offer, how many workers will be available for the 15 or more children, nor the ages of the children likely to be in the crèche. Since my son is learning to walk and putting everything he comes across in his mouth, he requires full time one-on-one attention as he is extremely curious and determined, yet very unsteady on his feet and likely to choke on or swallow small harmful objects. I am shocked therefore that the job centre just expects me to coldly dump my child with strangers, and gives no regard to breastfeeding mothers.

Although each mother at the group information session will have unique and specific requirements and needs, given the size of the group I don’t see how anything other than general information that could be offered over the web or in a leaflet could be provided. Compelling us to attend in person is therefore sheer harassment.

This is not the first time I am called in for an interview. When my son was five months old, I was forced to attend. I tried to protest but was told that fully breastfeeding my son was not a good reason for not attending. Having travelled an hour each way across town, and then been made to wait for half an hour while a member of the jobcentre staff became available, I was then asked a total of one question: “Are you interested in returning to work?” When I answered: “No thanks, I’m still breastfeeding”, I was told I could leave and that was the end of the interview. Surely this could have been done over the phone, or better still in a note? I couldn’t even get my travel costs for this appointment refunded without incurring more travel to a tube station to print out proof of my oyster card usage – more time and travel costs that I would have to pay for myself.

It is ludicrous that the government thinks that I should seriously consider leaving my son to get paid work at this time in his development when he needs such concentrated attention. It is especially ludicrous given the lack of affordable, experienced and committed childcare. And I do mean committed: it takes love and commitment to pay full attention to a child of this age. I have the love and the commitment – why is that not recognized? Why is someone else’s care preferable to mine? Why am I being forced to attend an interview despite not being interested in paid work at this time, and not needing ‘help’ to consider it? Why this pressure to leave my son?

I have enough on my plate trying to make my limited budget stretch to all the new needs I now face. And given that there is no free childcare offered until my son is three years old (and even then very limited), I don’t see how paying a stranger to care for him, while I seek similarly underpaid part-time work (perhaps even caring for someone else’s children), will benefit either of us, financially or otherwise.

It is deeply offensive to suggest that the full time mothering I am now doing is anything other than very hard work, no matter how rewarding. To harass mothers like this by making such appointments compulsory sends a clear message that the intensive 24/7 work we are already doing, is of less value than the work of attending pointless interviews and ‘group sessions’, or taking any paid job.

Moreover, if the government is to truly encourage breastfeeding for the recommended time of up to two years, then mothers must be supported rather than harassed by government agencies. I thought maternity leave was now one year, but I find that mothers on the lowest income don’t even have a right to this.

Furthermore, I am appalled that these ‘back-to-work’ sessions are subcontracted out to private companies, such as the Mickey Star Centre in St Michaels St, London W2, and that they are given targets to meet so that their profit is dependent on harassing mothers on benefits who are already overworked and in poverty.

What kind of message does this send out about how much the State values motherhood, children, breastfeeding and all our wellbeing?

As a mother I should be supported at every stage. Advice and resources should be offered so I can consider my options when my son and I are ready. Compulsion is incompatible with my child’s wellbeing. It damages my sense of accomplishment and worth as a mother, and puts strain on our relationship.

Yours sincerely,

JH

____________________________________________________

Statement by Sheila Kitzinger, breastfeeding campaigner and writer

A Welfare Reform policy will only function effectively when the Government ensures that no mothers are struggling in poverty and forced to work outside the home.

Motherhood is one of the most demanding and energy-consuming jobs there is. And it is the most important commitment for the future of any society. The relationship between a child and a mother is the root from which all human interaction springs.

Being a mother is hard work, emotionally, physically and mentally. It is not a spare time activity. Caring is not just a matter of changing nappies, cleaning up, tackling piles of laundry, feeding infants, and popping them into cots where they sleep peacefully all night. Mothering cannot be relegated to the interstices of life while we get on with important things like earning money. A mother gives herself.

__________________________________________

Statement from the mother of a child with a disability

As the mother of a child with a life-threatening disability I say the Welfare Reform Bill is no good for children or their mothers.

I’m a mother of a young child who has disabilities. I also myself have a long-term illness. I have been struggling to care for my daughter and myself. Because of my daughter’s disability (Sickle Cell Anaemia) she can go into a life-threatening condition suddenly. To look after a disabled child, a mother works harder because of the added worries of health issues. It’s very stressful for both of us. With the Welfare Reform Bill, I’ve got the added worry of my benefit being cut anytime and what I would have to do get it reinstated. I’ve already gone through this and it is now a constant worry which makes my struggle as the mother of disabled child really hard.

I was wrongly cut off benefits for not attending a work-focused interview even though I rang to cancel. After two cancellations they automatically seem to cut mothers off with no concern about the difficulties or the disabilities we and our children have, how our children are going to survive and how we are going to explain to a child that there is no money for food. Then our Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit also get cut and we are left homeless. It’s a huge job to get it all put back, on top of the work of the disabilities that we are dealing with.

I know other mothers this has happened to. We are not taken into account, we are just a number; we are treated as targets to meet.

There is the work of getting Disability Living Allowance for my daughter. It took us over a year to finally win DLA for my daughter, because they turned us down and we had to go to Tribunal. We had help from WinVisible, imagine someone without help. They treat us like we are not entitled, but we are.

And now there is the Welfare Reform Bill. If I was told today that I had to go into waged work it would be very difficult not only for me but especially for my child. I wouldn’t want to leave her in the care of someone else who may not have her needs at heart as her mother does or be as aware of her condition – it could be fatal for my child. If I was in waged work I would have to leave suddenly if was my daughter was ill – not a lot of jobs let you do that. And if my daughter was very ill I would have to leave the job and go back on benefits. I’m already working caring for my child but the work I’m doing is not paid, so now they are asking me to do paid work on top of all my unwaged caring work, which is devastating and exhausting. And how would my daughter feel knowing that I was no longer able to be there for her as I have been? My love and care have been life saving as well as a reassurance during the most difficult times, when she is facing terrible pain and distress. The Welfare Reform Bill doesn’t take any of that into account. That’s why it isn’t good for mothers or children.

Stella Mpaka

22 June 2009

____________________________________________________

Woman with mental health problems hounded by Jobcentre staff

A woman with acute depression and behavioural problems (attributed to brain damage from a road traffic accident), unable to cope with official interviews, had an “unfortunate experience” at the hands of Jobcentre staff, the Dept. for Work and Pensions admitted. Under Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), people with disabilities now have to attend a work-focussed interview, then an assessment, followed by compulsory “work-focussed activity”. Only people whose disabilities are extremely severe are exempt. ESA claimants have to deal with a bewildering three different offices – the DWP Benefit Delivery Centre, privatised Medical Services (Atos Origin Ltd.) and the Jobcentre.

Having to repeat information about her health history, on forms and by phone, was making the woman more anxious and suicidal, and aggravating her behavioural problems, so she was unable to complete the required form. She had sick notes covering her claim.

Jobcentre staff ignored phone calls and letters from WinVisible, from concerned medical practitioners and even a letter from the woman’s MP. They insisted that attending the work-focussed interview was obligatory, suggesting that WinVisible should accompany the woman if she had behavioural problems which they were not trained for. Interviews were automatically rescheduled, culminating in a “Pathways to Work” interview.

Finally, Compliance Officers came to the woman’s home. They pushed a letter under her inner front door, which threatened that her benefit would stop unless she contacted them to explain herself. WinVisible immediately phoned the Jobcentre, telling the Compliance Officer that we had notified the Adviser she could not attend. The Officer maintained that the interview could not be waived -- their actions were government policy. WinVisible answered that Compliance Officers are responsible if, as a result of their actions, anything happened to vulnerable claimants who are already suicidal. The Compliance Officer put the phone down on WinVisible. (She later said the call was unexpectedly cut off.)

After our complaint, the DWP acknowledged that Jobcentre staff applied the wrong rules. They had not taken the extra steps which, according to officials, are there to safeguard people with mental health problems. They had delivered the wrong letter at the home visit – the ESA letter is not supposed to contain any threat to stop benefit. Jobcentre staff could not threaten to cut the woman’s benefit, as no decision was yet made on whether her lack of compliance was wilful or a result of her illness. She was at the assessment stage, before the main stage when sanctions could be applied. The DWP acknowledged that claimants perceive the home visit as a threat, and that staff should have acted to alleviate that threat, but described such powers to visit as “support”.

The woman was made distraught by the threatening letter. ‘When I found the note from the Jobcentre under my door, it added to my feelings of fear, panic and distress. It made me feel that if the people I thought were there to help me worked against me, that there was no point in going on. It has only been with the help of WinVisible, my friends and my psychiatrist that I have started to pull myself back together.’

WinVisible was on hand to support her and to phone the Jobcentre immediately. But what is happening to vulnerable claimants who don’t have anyone to help fight their corner? Prof. Peter Beresford reported* about a man terminally ill with cancer, in his last days in a hospice, pressed by the Jobcentre that he had to go there for the sake of his ESA claim, and who died before payment. It is shocking that there is no legal duty of care towards claimants, to protect us from official bullying and brutality.

*Insensitive treatment of dying claimant raises fears over new benefit, JoePublicBlog. Guardian, 10 March 2009

______________________________________

Child clinical psychologist OLIVER JAMES on the Welfare Reform Bill
requirements that parents of young children take on waged work.

The statement focuses on mothers of children under three because these mothers are already being targeted. In pilot areas they would be required to participate in ‘work-related activity’, in preparation for the programme to be rolled out nationally, and there is mounting evidence that despite government denials many have already been called in for interviews. We also know of single mothers of children under one still being breastfed, who have had to attend such interviews. The government is even refusing to exempt mothers of children with disabilities who receive low rate Disability Living Allowance

From: oliver.james
Sent: 17 June 2009 14:39
Subject: Lords debate, Thursday
Importance: High

Pressurizing mothers of under-threes to return to work is disgraceful. The government should be crucified for its present attempt to do so because if the bill becomes law it will increase depression among mothers and mental illness among their children.

Firstly, there is a mountain of evidence that when mothers with small children who strongly wish to care for them are forced back to work it greatly increases their risk of depression. If depressed, they become less responsive as mothers, increasing risk of many problems in their children, from antisocial behaviour to psychiatric illnesses. A depressed mother is also more likely to have a disharmonious relationship with partners, also increasing disturbance in children.

Secondly, if an under-three year old is separated from its mother and left in inadequate substitute care it is at higher risk of becoming aggressive, insecure and of developing ADHD. A high proportion of substitute care available to women with low incomes is completely inadequate. There is no excuse for subjecting under-threes to it.

If the ministers passing this bill were forced to have their own children placed in this low quality of care, rather than the nannies that they use, it might change their minds.

____________________________________________

From a mother who fled domestic violence:
You can’t put a time limit as if everyone was the same.

I am a single mum living on sickness benefit, because I have been through a number of traumatic and violent experiences, including rape and domestic violence. I suffer from depression, eating disorders, and I am a recovering alcoholic and drug user.

There is a lot of prejudice and ignorance with regard to addictions. Although it has been recognised by the World Health Organisation as a disease, it is still common for a lot of people to think it is just down to willpower. Most addicts I have met have become so following extreme violent traumas, horrific experiences like incest and child abuse.

Anyone who’s been in that place can testify that addiction is not a party situation but rather a way of numbing pain that is unbearable and too much to carry. The drugs and alcohol become a double-edged sword coping mechanism. It is a dark place that scars you for life. It is not as simple as self-pity either. The contradiction is that it is about survival even if it is also self-destructive. If I had to go out to work in the midst of my active addiction I would need to drink or take drugs as my nervous system wouldn’t allow me to leave my house in any other way. This of course will not be tolerated in a workplace nor will it be safe for the people around you.

If the government forces women escaping domestic violence to work after one month, they obviously have no idea what they’re doing -- then again maybe they do and they don’t care. You can’t really put a time limit as if everyone was the same. Depending on the person you are, how much you have been bullied, if there are children involved, how long you have been under someone else’s control, how much you have lost your sense of self. . . It is very much down to how each individual heals and if they heal at all. Once your balance is rocked in this area, life is never the same again.

When I left my partner I felt reduced to nothing. He was very controlling and manipulative, as well as physically violent. He stole my passport and my benefits and just gave me £5 a week to live on out of my own money. This made me totally dependent on him. I had been treated really badly, I had lost my sense of identity, and had turned to alcohol just to cope with it. It took a long time for me to plan leaving and to admit to myself how bad things were, partly because of the state I was in.

I also couldn’t get my head around this kind of behaviour and thought there must be good in there somewhere. As a woman we are blessed with these mothering feelings and it is meant to be a good thing. That’s love, and love is meant to be unconditional.

When I left him I had nowhere to go, no savings for a deposit for somewhere to stay. I did not know there were refuges. I basically moved into the street, just me and my rucksack. I spent three months crashing on people’s floors, most of whom I didn’t know. My mother helped me with some money towards a deposit for a flat. The flat hunting wasn’t easy and the money was chipped away for food and survival. I finally got a hostel place at the end of the three months. I felt like a dog. I couldn’t even face what had happened. I needed to find help to think through what happened. I went to rehab and stopped drinking. If I had been forced to seek work at this stage it would have been pointless -- I was shaking and a complete wreck, I could never have passed a job interview.

Also, I would have been vulnerable in a new job. When my self esteem was so low, other people would have sniffed out that I was vulnerable and weak, and they would have bullied me or something. I have been treated disrespectfully in jobs in the past, and I can’t afford to put myself in that position again until I’m better and stronger.

Being forced into a work situation prematurely has a very high risk of backfiring. I am certain that the crime rate would increase and so would the suicide rate. I can’t help but think that would just suit certain people just fine. To me it seems that victims of violence keep getting victimised.

It is very hard to live on benefits now as the attitude benefits assessors seem to take is that we are all fraudsters. I have to keep reminding myself that I ended up on sickness benefit because of what someone else did to me so as not to feel so guilty.

Often I feel like I spend 70% of my energy dealing with the system, instead of on getting well. I am ill and yet I am constantly asked to bring in papers, to prove things. I sometimes lose stuff, because I am not very together and it’s all held against you as if you were fine. But the fact is I am ill. They lose a lot of information too, they are always losing my papers, but it isn’t held against them!

I went for a medical last winter. I have heard that the person assessing you is not qualified as a doctor or in my case as a psychiatrist. He asked me a lot of simple questions with no space for me to give an elaborate answer. He ticked some boxes that if you have a real mental health issue you can’t fit into. Questions such as asking how many times a day are you not able to do this or that or unable to do without help. In my case as in many others I am sure, there isn’t such order to one’s illness. It fluctuates. Some days I feel really strong but these days are not predictable. The following day I may feel back in complete darkness where I can’t even leave the house.

It was decided that I was now fit for work. This of course isn’t the case as I am not even capable of handling my day to day business without extreme effort. Also they seemed to have filled out a form for me that I was meant to have filled out myself but knew nothing about. 90% of the answers had nothing to do with my situation. I appealed and was told to go to a hearing to prove myself ill which again is a nerve-racking thing. Firstly, I am not even sure if I would feel fit to leave the house the day of the hearing. Secondly, it put me in a lot of stress with regards to the only security and feeling of safety I have, which is in knowing that there is a roof over my and my son’s head, and food in our stomachs.

Also you may be able to exit this relationship physically but that doesn’t mean that the abuse stops there. You are in a mental prison after having been controlled for so long. And often the man will find ways to get to you and search for you to threaten you or your children for the rest of you life.

If I was to work now in a regular job and lost all my benefits I wouldn’t be able to cope. I’d have to work long hours to pay my rent and everything -- London is very expensive. And I’d feel bad about leaving my son with strangers all day. He is three years old and starts reception soon. Right now it would be wrong for us. Where I grew up in Norway we only went to school for half a day till we were 10 years old. I don’t think little kids should be away from their mums for hours and hours every day. It’s not healthy.

What people like me need is compassion, care and regular therapy, and especially justice, to enable us to come to terms with what has gone so badly in our lives. When violent men are not prosecuted it leaves you feeling like the violence is somehow your fault, like you must have done something wrong to be in that situation. People don’t realise what a massive task it is to come back from that kind of life. We have to learn new ways to relate to people, and to protect ourselves in the future, so we don’t become victims again. People like me will only be made more ill or even be driven to suicide if the government keeps increasing the pressure on us to get a job.