West Virginia’s Disability surpasses that of the National average
Yet, the fraction of the population who end up being inactive irrespective of the Disability standing are the same across all States
Physical or mental ailments that limit a person’s movements, senses, or activities place a person at an utmost disadvantage in our utterly competitive societies.
According to the WHO (world health organization), approximately 15% of the world’s population lived with disabilities in 2011.?World Report on Disability?suggested 2–4% of the disabled population worldwide experienced significant difficulties in functioning.
Disabled People in the World in 2021?are increasing. Today there are more than 1 billion disabled people in the world.
By definition, a disabled person has a problem in body function or structure that limits their ability to execute a task or action; or causes participation restriction. It is higher than earlier WHO guesstimates, from the 1970s and suggested a figure of around 10%.
The global disability prevalence is on the rise due to population aging and the rapid spread of chronic diseases, and advances in the practices used to measure disability.
According to a report, in the United States, 41.1 million (12.7% of the total population) people who lived with some form of disability in 2019 were not institutionalized.
The percentage of West Virginians with disabilities not requiring institutionalization in 2019 with a disability was 19.8% — the highest rate of any state in the nation. Utah being, at 9.3%, had the lowest rate.
Only 7.9 million civilian noninstitutionalized population ages 18 to 64 with a disability were employed in 2019 — their median earning was $25,270 over 12 months.
Why does West Virginia have the highest Disability Claims?
According to a publication in?Forbes magazine in 2015, West Virginia is known to be the home of one of the nation’s highest-paid disability insurance lawyers. The author’s opinion is that it’s likely not a coincidence that West Virginia further has the highest percentage (15%) of young adults ages 24 to 64 on federal disability.
For comparison, Utah and North Dakota are at the other end of the spectrum, with only 3% of the young adult on disability. But, the?West Virginia department of health and human services?has a different perspective.
West Virginia’s behavioral risk factor surveillance system suggests increasing chronic diseases such as cardiovascular disease, obesity, and diabetes mellitus. These are correlated with an increasing prevalence of poor diet, sedentary lifestyle, and poor socioeconomic conditions.
In line with the?center for disease control (CDC)?report, a snapshot of disability costs in healthcare expenditure in West Virginia surpasses that of the national average. Nonetheless, interestingly enough, the fraction of the population who end up being inactive irrespective of the disability status are comparable between The State of West Virginia and the entire United States. Furthermore, West Virginia is not the only state with an obese population or high cardiovascular prevalence. Mississippi has the highest obesity prevalence in the nation.
Adapted from: CDC’s National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities
People with Disabilities need aid, but efforts measures don’t add up to expectations
People with disabilities must have opportunities to thrive and even be as competitive as possible amid their disadvantage. However, is bureaucracy getting the job done right? — OR is the redistribution of wealth being enough to fight this problem at the political stage?
领英推荐
Welfare Spending is the most oversized item in the federal budget program. According to a?2011 report?from United States Budget Committee, the total amount spent on a total of 80-plus federal welfare programs amounts to roughly $1.03 trillion. A significant portion of this fund is wasted in various ways, including fraudulent endeavors. Because Welfare programs also are a magnet for fraud. For instance, in 2017 a six Lakewood, New Jersey couples were charged with a welfare scheme, bringing to 26 the number of people implicated in the multimillion-dollar scandal in a single week. The allegation was that they all failed to report income that would have made them ineligible for the assistance programs. Allegedly, state and federal prosecutors detailed, the families collected over $2.4 million in benefits and fraudulently obtained approximately $400,000 in Medicaid, food, and heating benefits.
In 1990, president George H.W. Bush took a different angle to support disability rights, as he enacted the Americans with Disabilities Act. (ADA) The bill was executed to prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities. Of course, one of the intents in support of ADA was to facilitate encouragement to put as many citizens with disabilities back into the workforce as possible. Still, recent statistics don’t seem to reflect its success.
Chronological history suggests that, unfortunately, once people are labeled as disabled to work, they are highly expected to continue to receive social security retirement or pass on rather than returning to work unless those assistances are suspended.
Grown-ups with a?disability are often incapable?of working and make sufficient dough from working to support themselves or their families. They usually have not as much schooling and fewer assets than the overall populace.
The question, then, is, who should help the impaired?
Naturally, in the case of children, it is the parents. That is also valid for adults who have been incapable of caring for themselves since childhood.
In the case of most adults, there is a bitter truth. It means the party eventually liable for their help is themselves.
If somebody is powerless to provide for his support, the case might be made that it is morally his family who bears such responsibility.
Some may argue that bearing collective responsibility for the disadvantaged is the charity and right thing to do. But then again, although charity as an independent entity is a good deed. Nonetheless, forcibly taking money from one American and giving it to another even because the other American is underprivileged, disabled, could put it to better use, or “needs it” — is not charity. It is oppression, larceny, and income redistribution. Additionally, it will benefit one group like attorneys more than the disabled beneficiaries. Just as mentioned earlier, in West Virginia, single?attorneys?earned federal disability benefits for some 1,800 clients between 2006 and 2010, costing a total of about $2.5 billion to the U.S. treasury.