Love or livelihood: a cruel dilemma for those of us with extreme disabilities

All of these considerations result in the wheelchair user being required to pay higher than average rent.

Alternatively, if the wheelchair users are public housing tenants, the state government charges twenty-five per cent of both their incomes: hence, they do not enjoy any economy of scale in relation to rent.

Argument Two: The individual's financial welfare is his/her own concern

Australia has an income support system that is designed to be a safety net for people unable to support themselves without calling on the resources of the community. The income and assets tests are used to target the system so that it remains sustainable and affordable for Australian taxpayers. (Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs)

Further, the Australian Treasury states that the primary purpose of Australia's transfer, or social security, system is to provide individuals with a 'minimum adequate standard of living': (2010: 485).

While the intention behind the Treasury's words may accord with the Disability Convention (Article 28), in a media release on 22 March 2013 the ACOSS reported that approximately 620,000 people with disabilities live in poverty. Price Waterhouse Coopers in their 2011 publication estimates that approximately 45% of people with a disability in Australia live in or near poverty: more than double the OECD average of 22%.

The Australian Government's own reports (see Table 19) show that 91.7% of Disability Support Pensioners earn no income (i.e. less than 9% earns any money) and less than 1% earn over $1,000 per fortnight.

Argument Three: Income support is a privilege which must be balanced with responsibilities

This understanding of social welfare was made popular in the 1980s' and 1990s by right-wing governments in the United Kingdom and the United States. The Howard Government's welfare reforms also saw increased social obligations expected from welfare recipients.

Esteemed writers, such as Aristotle (a government should govern for all its citizens) and John Locke (members join self governing communities to benefit from the membership), have provided our politic system's foundation and have included notions of human rights.

More importantly, however, in 2008 Australia ratified the United Nations Disability Convention. In doing so, it acknowledged that the welfare of people with disabilities is a community concern.

Article 28 of the Convention requires Australia to recognise the right of persons with disabilities to an adequate standard of living not only for us but also for our families.

Argument Four: Income support is not a personal asset

Few Disability Support Pensioners would be able to articulate how the thresholds work or which precise level of earned income is the optimum return of investment of their time, energy and work-related expenses. Most, however, would have a sense that there is a diminishing return.

My own experience is a testament. In the 1980s when I was 'employed' in a large Sydney sheltered workshop and earning five dollars a week, we often heard it said that if we were paid more, it would reduce our invalid pensions. I would suspect similar half-truths would continue today.