Letter

Two-sided poll tax

Dear healthmatters — I would like to alert your readers to some of the un-pleasant implications that the introduction of the poll tax will have for people with learning difficulties.

The government clearly intends that by replacing rates (a property tax) with a tax on each individual, the electorate will be encouraged to heed financial self-interest and ‘vote out’ high-spending local councils.

On the grounds that they are unable to exercise their right to vote — and thus have a say in the cost and quality of local services — people categorised as having ‘severe’ mental handicaps have been exempted by the government from having to pay the poll tax.

This apparent generosity does raise the question of whether democratic participation is a right we are now to be charged for?

That aside, by linking taxation to ‘intellectual ability’, rather than ability to pay, there are disturbing implications for the ‘labelling’, care and civil liberties of people with learning difficulties.

People with learning difficulties who live independently or with their families will face the chance of paying the poll tax in full (or 20 percent of it if they are in receipt of income supplement), or of trying to persuade a medical practitioner to reach a diagnosis of severe mental impairment which will exempt them.

The undoubted financial pressure towards the latter fuels a process of stigmatising and labelling which can only exacerbate society’s current negative attitudes towards mental handicap.

Additionally, people labelled as ‘severely’ mentally handicapped are far more likely to be viewed as a ‘medical problem’ and treated accordingly.

This is inappropriate when in fact the greatest barriers to their opportunity to live an ‘ordinary life’ are socially and economically imposed ‘handicaps’.

In addition, a diagnosis of ‘severe’ mental handicap imposes legal restrictions on the rights these people have to sexual relationships.

The introduction of the poll tax should alert anyone who has contact with people with learning difficulties to the danger that an already disadvantaged group will be further disadvantaged.

Exempting people deemed ‘severely’ handicapped does them no favours, and merely does them no favours, and merely demonstrates a misplaced paternalistic concern from which people with learning difficulties have suffered for too long.