• Search
  • You are here:  
  • Home
  • News
  • Can you speak up for disabled young people?

News

Can you speak up for disabled young people?

Details

Disabled young people, especially those living with mental health or neurodiversity issues, are currently being demonised by the media and targeted by the government for potential cuts in benefits. A review taking place now gives young people and their parents and carers the opportunity to challenge the relentless negativity.

One of the proposals in the Pathways to Work Green paper was to delay access to the UC health element until age 22, meaning that younger people would not be eligible.  The claim is that this would make it less likely that young people would be trapped in a life on benefits.  The proposal is pencilled in for 2027/28.

Not entirely coincidentally, in November 2025 Alan Milburn was commissioned to write a report on young people and work, looking in particular at why so many young people are Not in Education, Employment or Training (NEET), including those claiming health and disability benefits.

The Milburn review has now called for evidence from the public, including:

  • young disabled people and people with health conditions
  • young people with lived experience of not being in employment, education, or training
  • parents and carers for young people

The review is looking for answers to two questions:

1. What is stopping more young people from participating in employment, education or training? 

2. What would make the biggest difference to support more young people to participate? 

Among the issues the review is interested in hearing about are:

  • changes in health trends (particularly mental health and neuro-developmental conditions)
  • the benefits and employment support systems
  • the changing nature of the labour market and work
  • any changes in the aspirations and attitudes of young people and employers

The closing date for submissions, which can be made by email to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. is Friday 30 January.

If you don’t agree that young people with mental health and neuro-developmental conditions are all TikTok trained blaggers who should be prevented from getting the health element of UC and instead forced into working in the hospitality and construction industries, then please take the time to respond to the consultation.

More information on the Milburn consultation is available here.

 

Comments

Write comments...
or post as a guest
People in conversation:
Loading comment... The comment will be refreshed after 00:00.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Maisy
    · 5 days ago
    I was just coming out of college when I became unwell. I was young, had plans, and never imagined my health would fail me at that stage of my life. I didn’t choose this. What’s painful is seeing the effort I put into my education, trying to move forward, only to have people like me portrayed as “lazy” or unwilling to work.

    I would like to work. But that ignores the reality of how long diagnosis and assessment actually take. Delays in care don’t simply put life on hold, they actively make outcomes worse. Conditions that were once manageable, or not even present, can deteriorate or multiply because support came too late. By the time help arrives, people are often far less able to participate than they would have been with early intervention.

    This is made even harder by repeated dismissal and, in my case, being autistic. Navigating health and benefits systems already requires energy and executive function many disabled and neurodivergent people simply don’t have in abundance. The result is a system that creates additional barriers, then blames young people for not overcoming them.

    Policies that delay access to support risk trapping people in worse health, not preventing dependency. If the aim is participation, earlier diagnosis, timely care, and realistic support would make far more difference than removing help at the point people need it most.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Neil Cook
    · 11 days ago
    I'm Ruddy scared too death if the DWP target is oldies as well.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Copycat
    · 14 days ago
    Change is coming down the line whoever is in charge be it con/Reform or green/libs because the economy is not growing and their won't be the money.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Azalea
      · 2 days ago
      @Neil There aren't just three parties. The SNP have made improvements to the benefits system. The Greens, Plaid Cymru and ( mostly) the Lib Dems also aren't attacking us.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Copycat
      · 7 days ago
      @Neil Neil where have you been.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Neil
      · 9 days ago
      @John All three parties are only interested in screwing us over via maliciously planted rhetoric designed solely to pit everyone possible against us.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      bronc
      · 9 days ago
      @John AI poses a grave threat to hundreds of millions of jobs globally as the US Senate has pointed out in a recent report commissioned by Senator Bernie Sanders. But AI and humanoid robotics also have the potential in the right hands to help us cope with a rapidly aging society
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      bronc
      · 9 days ago
      @John I appreciate what you are saying. Sorry I just don't buy the lesser evil argument regarding Labour. Labour is in hock to the interests of the super rich whose wealth is not being touched in any way while we get attack after attack on claimants. Labour is proceeding full steam ahead with the privatisation of the NHS, jailing thousands for civil dissent and has a foreign policy which breaks international law with impunity. Labour is going to get decimated in the next election. We will not get progressive change until Labour is comprehensively defeated. You don't mention Your Party which has over 50,000 members and will I strongly suspect have an unofficial electoral pact with the Greens in the upcoming local elections. You also don't address the massive anger within the unions with Labour. In my union branch and many other gatherings of members there is total opposition to Labour. Working class people quite rightly are abandoning Labour which gave up on them a long time ago.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    John
    · 14 days ago
    At the end of January the government is starting a new campaign to increase claimant and coincidentally public awareness of benefit fraud. The campaign will run across a range of channels, including on demand video, out-of-home, digital display, paid search and paid social. And focus on failure to notify of change of circumstances.

    Is this a genuine attempt to reduce overpayments or an attempt to rally the public against those on benefits, before the government tries to further cut benefit spending.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    bronc
    · 15 days ago
    Here is my submission to this so called consultation anyone feel free to use any or all of it if you want to make a submission. 
    Submission to the Young People and Work Report: Call for Evidence


    From the perspective of a disabled person

    Introduction

    This submission is made from the perspective of a disabled person in the UK, deeply concerned by the direction of government policy and its potential impact on the lives of thousands of young people with disabilities and health conditions. The proposal to restrict access to the health element of Universal Credit (UC) for young people aged 18-21 is not only a regressive policy but also a clear violation of the UK's international human rights obligations under the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR).

    This response will address the two key questions posed by the consultation, drawing on evidence  to demonstrate why the proposed changes will be detrimental to the well-being and future prospects of young disabled people.

    1. What is stopping more young people from participating in employment, education or training?

    The barriers preventing young disabled people from participating in employment, education, or training (EET) are complex and multifaceted. They are not, as has been suggested, a result of a lack of aspiration or a desire to live on benefits. Rather, they are a combination of health-related, systemic, and societal obstacles that the current system fails to adequately address.

    Health-Related Barriers

    A significant and growing number of young people are living with mental health conditions, neurodevelopmental conditions, and other disabilities. As the government's own data shows, four in five young people claiming the UC health element do so due to mental health or neurodevelopmental conditions. These are not trivial issues that can be overcome with a simple push into the workforce. They are serious health conditions that require appropriate medical care, support, and time to manage.

    Forcing young people with severe anxiety, depression, or autism into unsuitable work environments without the necessary support is not only cruel but also counterproductive. It is likely to exacerbate their health problems, leading to a revolving door of short-term, low-paid employment and long-term economic inactivity.

    Systemic Barriers in the Benefits System

    The proposed changes to the UC health element will create a two-tiered system of support, where a young person's right to an adequate standard of living is determined by the date they became disabled. This is a clear violation of the principle of non-discrimination enshrined in both the CRPD and the ICESCR. To suggest that a young person who becomes disabled after April 2026 is less deserving of support than someone with the exact same condition who claimed before that date is illogical and unjust.

    The reduction of the health element by almost 50% will push many young disabled people into poverty, making it even harder for them to focus on their health and prepare for work. The government's own figures suggest that 730,000 disabled people will be, on average, £3,000 a year worse off. This is not a recipe for encouraging people into work; it is a recipe for creating a generation of young disabled people who are trapped in poverty and despair.

    Labour Market and Societal Barriers

    Young disabled people face significant discrimination and stigma from employers. Many employers are unwilling to make the reasonable adjustments required by law, and there is a pervasive lack of understanding about the needs of disabled employees. The suggestion that young disabled people should be forced into the hospitality and construction industries demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of the diverse skills and abilities of disabled people, as well as the realities of these sectors.

    Furthermore, there are significant gaps in the support available to help young disabled people transition from education to employment. Career guidance is often generic and not tailored to the specific needs of disabled students, and there is a lack of coordination between education, health, and employment services.

    2. What would make the biggest difference to support more young people to participate?

    To genuinely support more young disabled people into EET, the government must abandon its punitive approach and instead focus on creating a supportive and enabling environment that respects their rights and dignity.

    Strengthen Social Protection, Don't Weaken It

    The single most important step the government could take is to scrap the proposed cuts to the UC health element. Instead of cutting support, the government should be strengthening the social safety net to ensure that all disabled people have an adequate standard of living, as required by Article 28 of the CRPD and Article 11 of the ICESCR. This would provide a stable foundation from which young disabled people can manage their health, build their skills, and prepare for work.

    Invest in Person-Centred Support

    Rather than a one-size-fits-all approach that forces people into unsuitable work, the government should invest in person-centred employment support that is tailored to the individual needs of each young disabled person. This should include:

    •
    Specialist employment advisors who understand the challenges faced by young people with mental health and neurodevelopmental conditions.

    •
    Funding for workplace adjustments and assistive technology.

    •
    Supported internships and apprenticeships that provide a structured and supportive pathway into work.

    •
    Investment in mental health services to ensure that young people can access the treatment and support they need, when they need it.

    Promote Inclusive Workplaces

    The government must take a much more proactive role in tackling employer discrimination and promoting inclusive workplaces. This should include:

    •
    Strengthening enforcement of the Equality Act 2010 to ensure that employers are held to account for discriminating against disabled people.

    •
    Incentivising employers to hire and support disabled young people, for example through tax breaks or grants.

    •
    Running a public awareness campaign to challenge the negative stereotypes and misconceptions about disabled people and work.

    Conclusion

    The government's proposals are based on a flawed and offensive premise: that young disabled people are lazy and need to be forced into work. The reality is that young disabled people are a diverse and talented group of individuals who are being held back by a system that is failing to support them.

    Instead of punishing them for their disabilities, the government should be investing in their futures. By upholding its international human rights obligations and implementing the supportive measures outlined in this submission, the government can create a society where all young people, regardless of their disability, have the opportunity to reach their full potential.

    References

    [1] United Nations. (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
    [2] United Nations. (1966). International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.
    [3] GOV.UK. (2025). Young People and Work Report: Call for Evidence.
    [4] Citizens Advice. (2025). Not so Universal: the two-tiered health element.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Geordielad880
    · 18 days ago
    I personally think having anxiety, depression, ADHD and other similar mental health conditions shouldn't entitle you to PIP, and I'm someone who has suffered with mental health problems including Agorophobia, Anxiety, depression and Autism spectrum, you should be entitled to Universal credit Health Element which is paid on the basis of engagement, as Treatment, support and therapy are what is required, with specialist employment support with links to employers that support or encourage employment of people with these conditions, and as you get employment you should get a tapered reduction in benefits to encourage people, and employers should be financially supported to encourage employment of people on benefits. 
    Mental health in young people is a very real problem, increasing significantly due to covid times, changing lack of social interaction due to social media, and lack of youth clubs etc, but benefits isn't the answer, treatment and support is. More funding should be provided to provide work from home opportunities for disabled people, as even so many government roles could be fulfilled by disabled or benefits claimants with targeted training and support, and more funding is desperately needed for apprenticeships in engineering, social care, nursing, and other services which are currently desperately short, giving young people good opportunities. I firmly believe that local jobs should be prioritised for people who have strong local connections aswell, same with housing. PIP should be reserved for the most severely disabled, I'm absolutely disgusted by the constant targeting of disabled people, and people on benefits in general, when ultimately it's the UKs decline, lack of investment in infrastructure, businesses and education that's the ultimate cause. Investment not austerity is what the country desperately needs. Illegal migration isnt the cause of the UKs issues, I'm not disputing it's an issue, but lack of housing, GP surgeries, schools etc, is caused by under investment. I also believe all things like council tax, housing benefit, etc, should be discounted based on household income and it shouldn't matter whether that's from employment or benefits, income is income, obviously disability has extra costs, but everyone needs to pay towards local services, as council funding is at an all time low, due to years of budget cuts, and demand has increased dramatically. I'm tired of hearing people saying state pension triple lock needs removing etc, it's not a benefit, it's a pension, and should be treated like that, the government constantly talks like they are too generous, I would encourage all young people to invest in a private pension and private health care at the earliest opportunity, the NHS is broken, and will eventually be privatised, it's inevitable, and it breaks my heart to say it, especially as someone who is 41 and relies heavily on the NHS, I have waited over 12 months for several appointments, and have eventually paid privately for therapies using PIP money, so without that money my health would deteroriate even more
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      John
      · 12 days ago
      @Geordielad880 How are you defining severe?

      To be eligible for PIP requires the health condition to be long-term expected to last at least 12 months and severe in that it impacts everyday daily living or mobility. And for fluctuating conditions how a claimant is over 50% of the time determines eligibility. The threshold for PIP is such that the daily living component is used as the passport benefit for carer's allowance. And for people living alone until they abolished the premium the Severe Disability Premium intended to help towards care costs.

      To be eligible for LCW requires they be incapable of any and all forms of employment, including part-time. To be eligible for LCWRA that they be also incapable of any and all forms of possible appropriate work related activities or that not finding them so would be a likely (will happen based on previous medical history) to cause a substantial (hospitalization or possible death) detrimental effect to health.

      If you are so ill or disabled your everyday life is substantially impacted or you are incapable of being in paid employment in any job is that not severe? It is definitely going to have a severe impact on your life. To be denied benefits in those circumstances would be disastrous for people.

      Are some people being left on the scrap heap, abandoned to a life of benefits when they could with help and support work. Yes but access to treatment and therapy and help into and support in work is a separate issue. If someone's health or life could be improved it should obviously be available. But that possibility should not be grounds for denying benefits. As if poverty will motivate them to get better. And disability and incapacity benefits would motivate them to be unwell.

      What drives singling out mental health conditions in my opinion is the false narratives endlessly parroted by politicians and the media. That masses of people are claiming PIP and LCWRA for a bit of anxiety, mild depression, the minor ups and downs of life that everyone suffers. That the numbers are too high, they cannot all be that disabled, that masses of people are playing the system exaggerating or making up mental health conditions and getting too easy to claim benefits. That masses of people are choosing the easy option of a idle life on overly generous benefits at hard working tax payers expense rather than making the effort to get well and get a job. That disability and incapacity benefits are a perverse incentive to choose a life on benefits rather than make the effort to get better and work. And that work would be good for their health. That they need to raise the threshold of eligibility and need some stick and carrot. As they are less genuine, less deserving than physical health conditions. And unlike physical health conditions cured by work.  
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Geordielad880
      · 13 days ago
      @Geordielad880 I'm sorry if my comment come across as lacking empathy, I was not referring to people who have severe mental health problems, or severe depression, I totally understand there are huge differences and variation between numerous conditions. I myself have severe depression and anxiety and have all my adult life, I personally don't think anyone should receive benefits for purely mental health conditions, unless severe, as the majority of conditions benefit from work or training etc, I understand that obviously doesn't apply to everyone, but simply been written off, and not having treatment etc and living off benefits for the rest of your life isn't the answer either, I understand some people won't improve no matter how much treatment they have and can never work, I was just outlining there is alot more that can be done, and more emphasis on GP and specialist input and opinions should be used to assess people, as dwp medicals are inaccurate and designed to not award people, and your GP or specialist have alot more knowledge of the person who is been assessed.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Aldo
      · 15 days ago
      @John Thanks for speaking sense, John.

      I've suffered with ill mental health my whole life, I have engaged with multiple therapies and taken multiple medications over the last thirty-plus years, and absolutely NOTHING has ever helped. I am at a stage now where I manage myself but cannot be around other people, both for their sake and mine. People like the moron above you are actually dangerous for mental health patients, and I don't believe they suffer with anything. If they did, they'd know how utterly ridiculous and dangerous they sound. Someone with mental health issues still has bills to pay; therefore, benefit money is needed. And what if, like me, you've done everything and there has been no improvement?

      I guess that's something no one, not even the NHS, likes to think about.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      bronc
      · 15 days ago
      @Geordielad880 Sorry but I strongly disagree with your view which displays a lack of both empathy and understanding of the truly devastating nature of illnesses such as depression which is a major cause of suicide in our society especially amongst young men. PIP is paid to help with the extra costs of your disability. The implication of your comment is to insinuate that illnesses such as depression are not a disability. You could not be more wrong.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      John
      · 17 days ago
      @Geordielad880 I do not know about the other medical conditions you mention. But depression is a very broad diagnosis. In terms of severity and nature of symptoms, frequency and length of depression, and how responsive it is to treatment. It includes people I think should be entitled to PIP and unconditional UC health. After all it includes people who need hospitalization including people who would be sectioned for depression and people who are long-stay months to years hospital inpatients, or need to live in care homes or have a carer.

      Also the idea that they need to be required to engage in treatment and therapy as a condition to receiving benefits. I think is insulting. To my mind it is implying people are choosing to not engage and stay on benefits. That they need some use of the stick and carrot. And promoting the lie that if only they took their meds or engaged in therapy or just manned up they would all be and stay well. It is also medically unethical in my opinion. 
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    Copycat
    · 19 days ago
    Unless very severely disabled it would be better if the young were doing something be it training or studying, as being stuck at home is no good for anyone.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      bronc
      · 15 days ago
      @Copycat Again you display a real lack of empathy and understanding of how some young people are affected by mental health conditions. Your comments reveal a profound lack of understanding of these illnesses. Go look at the medical research on this issue it is massive.
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Aldo
      · 17 days ago
      @Copycat In your opinion.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    John
    · 20 days ago
    Despite already announcing the government's planned policy of raising the age for claiming PIP to 18 and for claiming UC health to 22. And requiring young people to engage in employment, training or education. 

    The government is now having an independent impartial expert review focused on disabled young people into "What is stopping more young people from participating in employment, education or training?" and "What would make the biggest difference to support more young people to participate?"

    And to head this review they have chosen Milburn. Who has already said claimants are choosing the door of claiming to be too disabled to work due to the perverse incentives of more benefits money and less conditionality, vs the door to taking steps towards and into work. And due to the moral failure of claimants to take personal responsibility for their own lives. And that the solution is to move from a claimant led system to an employer led system. With employers, working with medical professionals and the DWP to get people into work.

    So we now wait to see if the independent impartial expert review findings and recommendations are. Will the findings be in agreement with the already announced government plans and the already known opinions of Milburn. Who knows?

    Being cynical I think the government knows. I think it is a stitch up. Just intended to give the MPs the political cover of claiming the policies are based on independent impartial expert evidence and the opinions of disabled people were take into account, rather than being ideological based on bigotry and scapegoating. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      Ginny52
      · 19 days ago
      @John Young people in supported housing have their housing benefit reduced if they work.
  • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
    clearwater
    · 20 days ago
    Parallel to the above news. 

    Re- Young people not in work on BBC R4 last week they were talking about Young people and social housing, I did not get the whole story and meant to return to the broadcast, I shall try to find the link and post.

    That aside my son was telling me a many young people don't work because the local councils wont let them work or study. So they become homeless and needing accommodation, then it goes in temporary accommodation, hostels etc etc.

    This means you are not eligible for social housing if working/studying. I am not entirely certain of all the facts.

    Apparently this is not widely known or discussed I guess amongst MP's or who ever decides this lot.

    The young people know this and very very many want social housing to escape the high rentals and evictions. My son has told me of himself being forced out of properties with section 21's , the letting agents simply don't care and profit from all of this.

    In turn it would seem the councils are encouraging not working or studying or limiting the hours to perhaps 10 a week. I should imagine more information will come to light one of these days.

    To my mind it is a little more complex than young people not working. I suspect a lot of youngsters really are spooked by what the future holds for them, especially with property/rental prices and uncertainty causes fear and anxiety.

    Hopefully others can shed light on what's really going on. 
    • Thank you for your comment. Comments are moderated before being published.
      keepingitreal
      · 20 days ago
      @clearwater I don't know all the permutations but it is difficult for students to claim any state assistance, and I have believed for a long time that housing costs, including student accommodation, contribute to almost everyone's struggles.

      Whilst we can adjust our consumption of fuel and food and choose less expensive ways to spend leisure time, cheaper/fewer clothes/treats etc, we have no choice over rent or mortgage payments, which have kept on rising disproportionately to earnings.

      Even in an earning household it's still too much for non-sharing single, and mostly takes two incomes to live in family accommodation, which brings problems with child care or when someone gets ill.

      It's just too expensive to keep a roof over your head, which is demotivating for young people. Life used often to be about getting as well qualified and as good a job as you could then onto the housing ladder with the most mortgage possible. There was something to aim for and the penny pinching was worthwhile and got easier and your quality of life improved. Now young people can't keep pace so what can they aspire to?

      Some of the older generation say they had it hard and did without kitchen gadgets and new furniture until they could afford it but nowadays you can afford all that and multiple tech devices, holidays abroad and a car even, but if you've nowhere to make your home there's no point.



Free PIP, ESA & UC Updates!

Delivered Fortnightly

Over 110,000 claimants and professionals subscribe to the UK's leading source of benefits news.

 
iContact

Latest news