Confused about PIP guidelines on mobility

DanE2010

dori2o wrote: »

To me it looks very much like they are doing away with the pain part of the process altogether.

Nowhere do I see severe pain mentioned in relation to walking.

Some of us are in excruciating pain before we start walking, thats before taking into account the instability in knees/hips/ankles etc etc.

I can force myself to walk more than 50m if I have to, i.e. walking from car to lift and from lift to desk at work, but as for how far I can walk before being in significant and unremitting pain, the answer is 0 meters.

I agree, its like the pain part has dissapeared like its no longer relevent. Its very relevent to me, I can walk but after a few minutes im in pain and your damn sure il be suffering when I get home because of it. I think many people like me will loose out because of this.....

fed_up_and_stressed

sunnyone wrote: »

No one should get IMVHO HRM of DLA if they cannot prove beyoned doubt that they have severe mobility difficulties at all times or the criteria is a joke.

The criteria is a joke atm btw or they wouldnt be changing the goal posts, if someone can walk around a hypermarket etc. they do not deserve HRM of DLA or the PIP equivalent.

How do YOU know the person staggering about the supermarket cause they have NO one to help them as they cant afford home delivery ..and they are parked in a blue badge bay isnt in immense physical discomfort /pain and will probably be in bed for days at a time after to recover from it !!!

Are you medically qualified ???

Editted to add I see you have been spouting medical advice to someone you haven't even met on another thread sunnyone.

To get DLA someone will generally have been assesed by a medically trained person as having mobility issues to the point of the qualifying features of the benefit.

I am sick of people with your "well you dont look sick to me attitude"

Cpt.Scarlet

dori2o wrote: »

To me it looks very much like they are doing away with the pain part of the process altogether.

Nowhere do I see severe pain mentioned in relation to walking.

Some of us are in excruciating pain before we start walking, thats before taking into account the instability in knees/hips/ankles etc etc.

I can force myself to walk more than 50m if I have to, i.e. walking from car to lift and from lift to desk at work, but as for how far I can walk before being in significant and unremitting pain, the answer is 0 meters.

It's in the heading to the moving descriptor

This activity considers a claimant’s physical ability to move around without severe discomfort such as breathlessness, pain or fatigue.

dori2o

Cpt.Scarlet wrote: »

It's in the heading to the moving descriptor

This activity considers a claimant’s physical ability to move around without severe discomfort such as breathlessness, pain or fatigue.

It's in the heading, but the actual descriptions do not make note of pain/fatigue/breathlessness at all.

a. Can stand and then move more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 0 points
b. Can stand and then move more than 50 metres but no more than 200 metres, either aided or unaided. 4 points
c. Can stand and then move unaided more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres. 8 points
d. Can stand and then move using an aid or appliance more than 20 metres but no more than 50 metres. 10 points
e. Can stand and then move more than 1 metre but no more than 20 metres, either aided or unaided. 12 points
f. Cannot, either aided or unaided, – 12 points

This same thing happened with DLA, t was made reference to in the question heading, but when it came to assessing the claim form it wasn't applied that way. Merely being able to walk 50m, either in pain or not was accepted as there being no mobility issues.

I had to fight and use the commissioners decision to get the decision not to award mobility overturned based at Tribunal.

That is another question to ask. Will the past commissioners decisions be considered when it comes to applying the relevant definitions for people able or unable to walk?

rogerblack

dori2o wrote: »

It's in the heading, but the actual descriptions do not make note of pain/fatigue/breathlessness at all.



This same thing happened with DLA, t was made reference to in the question heading, but when it came to assessing the claim form it wasn't applied that way. Merely being able to walk 50m, either in pain or not was accepted as there being no mobility issues.

It would make the descriptors very unwieldy if every descriptor had to have the full wording in it.
Placing it in the heading makes no legal difference whatsoever.

My only suggestion is to emphasise that the descriptor includes pain/... by including both the heading, and the descriptor you believe applies, along with any evidence you supply.

schrodie

rogerblack wrote: »

It would make the descriptors very unwieldy if every descriptor had to have the full wording in it.
Placing it in the heading makes no legal difference whatsoever.

My only suggestion is to emphasise that the descriptor includes pain/... by including both the heading, and the descriptor you believe applies, along with any evidence you supply.

If walking per se causes pain and discomfort should the 12 pointer be applied?

dori2o

schrodie wrote: »

If walking per se causes pain and discomfort should the 12 pointer be applied?

Exactly, thats the point I was trying to get to.

Some people walk despite the pain in circumstances that are necessary, and as I read it the descriptor, based on the current case law, should be interpreted that the onset of any significant/severe pain/distress would be the point at which the person is deemed to have stopped walking, but that I suppose is not what the actual descriptor will be interpreted as.

It will most likely (knowing ATOS) be interpreted as, how far can you walk, irrespective of how much pain/discomfort etc etc you are in, nor taking into account the after effects of daring to walk more than 50m.

JS477

If it always hurts to walk I suppose you'll have to tell them that your maximum walking distance before you're forced to stop is < 20m e.g. 15m.

dori2o

JS477 wrote: »

If it always hurts to walk I suppose you'll have to tell them that your maximum walking distance before you're forced to stop is < 20m e.g. 15m.

But the whole 'forced to stop' thing is completely wrong IMO.

Personally I try and get done what I need to before stopping. In other words I walk even when the pain is excruciating. That way when I rest it's for more than a few minutes before starting again.

Hence I can walk more than 20m or whatever limits they put on it. There is often little choice in the matter.

But as I said, every single step is taken in excruciating agony.

Again though it seems no reference is made as to the after effects of walking.

satarical

Hi folks. Can I put my little bit in this. I used to get the higher mobilising part of DLA until I went to am ESA assessment.
At that assessment the question of mobilising came up and I said that if need be I could walk 100 metres +. I then added that this was only made possible for two main reasons, the pain I have in the upper legs and back is eased considerably because of the heavy doses I take of Opiates every day and don't feel much anymore, and because I have always had a high pain threshold and can stand more pain then most before I have to give up.
They failed me on that and a few weeks later used that assessment to take away both my middle care and high mobility.
So if you take medicine to dull the pain you can walk further. Isn't that what medication is for, to give you a better lifestyle?
I agree with what sunnyone said. No one should have to walk about in pain. Pain can be managed in most if not all cases. It is so easy with the correct drugs and management to have a pain free life. So walking should never be affected by pain and it can't be used as an excuse.Mobilising should be restricted to the physical fact of not being able to put one foot in front of the other.