There is a belief that because informally carers supposedly saves the government a lot of money, they should get a lot of rights, equal if not greater than disabled people in the say of how disabled people live. We must become extremely careful that this economic argument is used to completely undermine the notion of disabled people being anything more than economic burdens and the property of their families.
As I keep saying, as soon as you have a informal carer in the political sense, society assumes you have a dependent half-being who is unable to consent and totally dependent on the carer, making no contribution to their families, communities and society.
In order to justify the money they received for ‘development work’, the care charities have objectified families, splitting husbands from wives, parents from children and so on, to create dependency where interdependent used to exist. Most appalling in their creation of young carers, a celebration of child abuse, when they tell children they have the right to control the lives of their parents if they fail to fit into social norms.
The economic argument is potentially a further attack on safeguarding as this government gives families the right to do want their want to their economic burdens as a thank you for saving them money.
If you like what I say, have a look at my website at www.simonstevens.com or follow me on twitter, @simonstevens74