Sir, The Government’s treatment of people on incapacity benefit is breathtaking hypocrisy (“Too fat to work", Nov 19). When I made an effort to get myself back to work while recovering from a long illness, and approached the Government’s “Work Care” programme, I was told I had “been off work too long” to qualify. No further help or alternatives were suggested. How ironic is this?

I do not believe that anyone finds existing on incapacity benefit a motivating or aspirational experience. All the people I have known on it find it a depressing and paralysing struggle. No one will be helped by the continued naming and shaming of those with genuine illnesses, nor until mental health and psychological illnesses are taken seriously and, destigmatised once and for all.

Victoria Butterell
Sheffield

Sir, One year ago I was a part-time physics teacher and mother of two small children leading an active and fulfilling life. I then became ill with an undiagnosed “fatigue” condition.

In the past year I have been reduced, at my worst, to being stuck in bed, having to crawl to the toilet, needing a wheelchair to go out, needing help to undress and having my food cut up for me.

Fortunately, my health is now improving and, although not fully fit, I am determined to return to work as soon as I am able. I am starting this week to return to reduced duties on an unpaid basis, hoping that a phased return to work will be possible if my health continues to improve. Obviously the financial implications of not currently earning a wage are huge. Do your readers seriously think that the £72.55 that I am receiving each week in incapacity benefit should not be paid to me? Does my life sound like an “easy option”?

Rachel Ephgrave
Leckhampton, Glos

Sir, My son Doug is physically disabled and lives in a Cheshire home. He has been able to obtain a first-class honours degree and has specific skills in designing websites that are accessible to disabled people, including those with visual problems. He has been headhunted by firms who need these skills. But Doug cannot take up these jobs.

Why not? Because benefits rules say that he cannot earn more than £20 per week without losing exactly the same amount from his benefit. He would also lose free prescriptions and other benefits.

Isn’t this a ridiculous situation? The taxpayer is paying for Doug to remain unemployed when he could be earning, paying taxes and contributing to his keep.

Stuart Paulley
Oldham, Lancs

Explore Letters

• Feedback