pip criteria

clemmatis

According to MIND, Barbara, supervision has been reinstated, so "assistance" and "prompting" are not the only support options now.

http://www.mind.org.uk/news/6011_mind_responds_to_new_pip_assessment

I can though see why you are concerned, and apparently, MIND are still concerned too.

Prinzessilein

I am unable to access the link on my laptop...but I can imagine the fun (!) I'd have trying to work out my points!

Is there any allowance made for variable conditions - I haven't had a blackout today (so far!) - what happens if I blackout when transfering my meal from the microwave to table? ...Or halfway through the meal...is there an assumption that if I reheat my meal in the microwave I am deemed to have managed to eat it?

I can manage a bus journey....but only on the one bus. It has to be the bus number I know. From one particular stop to another. I don't tolerate diversions. ....Then again, I'll have a 'virtua'l taxi to take me everyehere!...which would be fine, except I can use a phone, so couldn't book my cab!

This whole system is a nightmare!

System

clemmatis wrote: »

According to MIND, Barbara, supervision has been reinstated, so "assistance" and "prompting" are not the only support options now.

http://www.mind.org.uk/news/6011_mind_responds_to_new_pip_assessment

I can though see why you are concerned, and apparently, MIND are still concerned too.

But this whole plan by this government,to replace DLA with PIP is to save money by cutting back on benefits. That is the real reason for PIP. I don't think they should take away DLA or change the benefits system at all. DLA has been here in England for over 20 years and nobody gets DLA who is not entitled to it.

So disabled people on DLA are not sponging off the state, as some people think.

I think organisations like Mind and Disability Alliance should be doing more to protest and stop the government from passing this bill for PIP.

If this becomes real, many people will get less benefit to live on or no benefit at all.Under the new rules.

What about disabled organisations taking this matter and the government to the European Court Of Human Rights?

Maybe they can stop the bill for PIP going through parliament. And then PIP will not become legal and disabled people will still be able to keep their DLA.

Think about what I just said.That's what disability organisations should do to stop the government before it's too late. Barbara.

System

A_Flock_Of_Sheep wrote: »

GlasweJen - I think this still needs to be refined. It does not seem to take account of things DLA did like risk of aggressive and anti-social behaviour, blackouts, self harm/injury, prevention of danger to self/others, confusion, hearing voices, self neglect, awareness of common dangers.

That sounds like most of the things i'd score for


Though to be honest by the time PIP comes in i'm hoping not to need it. But its still very worrying for everyone I really don't think they've thought this through

krisskross

[QUOTE=annbarbs;49589345

"You need constant supervision throughout the day because you might cause danger to yourself or others. And you need someone to be awake to watch over you throughout the night because you might cause danger to yourself or others."

[/URL]

Barbara.[/QUOTE]

Do you use your HRC to pay to have these needs met or does the DLA just go into your savings account? Totally pointless handing out all this cash if it is not used to provide the care you say you cannot manage without.

clemmatis

I'm not defending PIP, Barbara, and if you'd read my posts on it, including post 7 in your other thread, you'd have seen that I'd said

before evaluating any claimants, the government has announced it will cut 20% off the DLA budget. It is, among other things, abolishing LRC/LRM DLA.

I don't need to think about what you've said. If you think there's a human rights case here, talk to a rights lawyer. If you think MIND etc, aren't doing enough (they may well not be), put pressure on them, and use the activist disability forums to do it.

But, it's important to get your facts right.

And, sorry, I'm not convinced every single person who gets DLA is fully entitled to their award. You don't need to say they are, to defend DLA, and I suggest you avoid saying it.

clemmatis

krisskross wrote: »

Do you use your HRC to pay to have these needs met or does the DLA just go into your savings account? Totally pointless handing out all this cash if it is not used to provide the care you say you cannot manage without.

That is, krisskross, no concern of yours. The DLA rules are clear: a claimant does not have to be receiving the care they need. That's in writing. There's a very good reason for that, IMO: DLA does not cover the cost of constant supervision by day or night, let alone, both; and the government knows it.

Richie-from-the-Boro

The second draft notes are here and .. .. the second draft regs are here .. .. the descriptors & weightings for the descriptors are in the notes *.pdf.

krisskross

clemmatis wrote: »

That is, krisskross, no concern of yours. The DLA rules are clear: a claimant does not have to be receiving the care they need. That's in writing. There's a very good reason for that, IMO: DLA does not cover the cost of constant supervision by day or night, let alone, both; and the government knows it.

I agree that DLA would not cover the total cost of 24 hour supervision but how on earth can you continue to claim money for a need that apparently puts you at high risk yet not have any requirement to make life safer for yourself, even though you are claiming taxpayers cash to do so.

TBH as I see it if you are managing without the supervision and don't use the extra money to fund help then you don't need it. Either the help or the money.

HRC DLA is almost £300 a month.....a lot of money. Value should be obtained for an outlay of this size. It shouldn't just be extra income.

GlasweJen

I still can't work out my pip score, even with the supervision put back in!