Budget - tougher for DLA claimants

Trialia

blahblahblah wrote: »

If people, when applying for DLA, had to submit a claim listing exactly the additional expenses incurred as a consequence of their disability, they could, if approved, get exactly the amount of money they needed to meet those expenses. People with higher levels of need could, in theory, then get higher levels of support.

Unfortunately, it took me three hours to fill out my last DLA form as it was, with professional help too. It would at least double that to have to do the above as well, and take days to achieve the cognitive clarity to get it all done - my short-term memory is f'cked. It's a good idea in principle, but I think it would be hard to put into practice, especially since costs vary so much from county to county.

easy

blahblahblah wrote: »

That's a good idea, perhaps DLA should be based on the actual additional costs incurred as a result of having a disability.

.............

If people, when applying for DLA, had to submit a claim listing exactly the additional expenses incurred as a consequence of their disability, they could, if approved, get exactly the amount of money they needed to meet those expenses. People with higher levels of need could, in theory, then get higher levels of support.

Only an idea.

It can't actually work that way tho' because ....

a) You don't know what extra costs you are going to incur over time
b) often you don't know what facilities and adaptations are out there to help you. You discover these on an ongoing basis
c) technology is ever improving. What is available now will be improved, added to or superceded in the next 12 months
d) peoples' conditions change all the time. Although I can currently climb stairs (with good hand-rails), in 12 months time I may need a stair-lift. Or as happened after some surgery I had a few years back, after 9 months recovery, I didn't need a wheelchair or stairlift anymore.

All that would basically mean that people would have to apply, and apply, and re-apply, possibly 2 or 3 times a year.

Furthermore, there is only a set amount of money to hand out. What happens when, half-way thru the year, the pot is empty because the early claimants all wanted expensive stuff ??

Indie_Kid

easy wrote: »

It can't actually work that way tho' because ....

a) You don't know what extra costs you are going to incur over time

Exactly. There are some costs I have every few months; but other costs are a one-off. (usually the more expensive things) Plus, special offers mean I may stock up on things that I need.

I also don't know whe I'm going to have a meltdown or be too tired to cook. Therefore, I can't say "I need to spend x amount every y weeks on takeaways".

Plus, why should I have to justify every cost to the DLA people?

It should not be seen as a 'compensation' payment for being ill.

I know people who see it as this and spend it on whatever.

jimbms

I have looked through over 400 pages on this thread about this subject and I cannot for the life of me understand what all the fuss is about, Here in the Isle of Man we have had this proceedure for years and it works very well, in fact quite often claimants have their DLA increased due to the doctors report, I myself was upgraded to high rate mobility on the last medical much to my suprise. The initial visit unless they suspect fraud is done by your own GP and so are all subsiquent. Quite often after the initial medical the visit is just to ensure a) you still have the condition and b) to make sure that you have everyting in your house you need to help you and if not it gets arranged. This we have found not only speeds the process up and ensures you get what is needed but also cuts out the inevitable skivers and con artists who give genuinly disabled a bad name and clog up the system. On the count of people with mental illness who claim, quite often this is done via a statement from their CPN. In my view the only people who have anything to fear from an assessment are the ones who are false claiments in the first place.

Trialia

jimbms, you seem very naive about this.

For my part, I don't currently have a CPN as there's a very long waiting list in my area. None of my physical illnesses are visible to the naked eye and the effects on someone with the conditions can vary widely between individuals.

So basically... what I say to your statement is: if only!

Indie_Kid

http://www.disabilityalliance.org/dbcpress2.htm

I don't have a CPN either.

jimbms

Trialia wrote: »

jimbms, you seem very naive about this.

For my part, I don't currently have a CPN as there's a very long waiting list in my area. None of my physical illnesses are visible to the naked eye and the effects on someone with the conditions can vary widely between individuals.

So basically... what I say to your statement is: if only!

How can I be naive about a system that has been in place and working well for a good number of years, the fact the NHS over there is not working is an issue that needs sorting, as for your illnesses not beeing visable neither are mine but as far as I know thats what the doctor does, assess your conditions based on assessment on you capabilities. so not if only, it actually works well.

Trialia

jimbms wrote: »

How can I be naive about a system that has been in place and working well for a good number of years, the fact the NHS over there is not working is an issue that needs sorting, as for your illnesses not beeing visable neither are mine but as far as I know thats what the doctor does, assess your conditions based on assessment on you capabilities. so not if only, it actually works well.

Oh, sure... I would take a guess and say that you don't have ATOS doing the medical exams for this working system? There are SO many problems with the system here. They don't get enough training in invisible illnesses or illnesses that fluctuate, they misreport the exams, and they assume everyone is faking because they want to meet their targets.

It took my doctors ten years to figure out HEDS was what was causing most of my problems, and there is as yet no diagnostic test for that or fibromyalgia (which in my case is secondary). I'm sure you can imagine why I don't have much faith in ATOS to have any idea what they're doing!

jimbms

Trialia wrote: »

Oh, sure... I would take a guess and say that you don't have ATOS doing the medical exams for this working system? There are SO many problems with the system here. They don't get enough training in invisible illnesses or illnesses that fluctuate, they misreport the exams, and they assume everyone is faking because they want to meet their targets.

It took my doctors ten years to figure out HEDS was what was causing most of my problems, and there is as yet no diagnostic test for that or fibromyalgia (which in my case is secondary). I'm sure you can imagine why I don't have much faith in ATOS to have any idea what they're doing!

I do not have a clue what ATOS is, but if you would care to read exactly what I said you would see I said the assessment if often done by your GP as are susbsiquent ones unless fraud is suspected. I don't dispute the UK NHS is in such a state you have no faith in it, all I was stating was that if the system is implemented correctly then you should have no fear because it works. The fact it is let down by petty beaurocracy is another matter, I can also see your point about targets and agree it is wrong, we have the opposite here, the UK NHS have for weeks been ringing me after I was sent by our NHS for an angiogram and have tried to convince me to tell my consultant I want go to Liverpool to have an angioplast that is not needed acording to my consultant because the health trust over there get a tidy sum for each one, they only backed down when a 2nd angiogram done in Ireland concluded Liverpool lied. So it seems in reality your NHS is in a bad way. so now on thought over that maybe I was wrong to suggest it would work for you, but the principal does work if the infrastructure is correct.

Trialia

's exactly it: it could not work well with the present infrastructure for England and Wales. ATOS are the contractors the DWP set to do medical exams on claimants, and they're horribly flawed in that. Yours may work just fine, and perhaps if a similar system were implemented here with the underlying infrastructure being the same it might work, but as it stands? Unfortunately not.