PIP - Consultation on the PIP assessment Moving around activity

schrodie

tokenfield wrote: »

Absolutely right!!

20 metres is approx. 82'. For someone that can only walk that distance and nothing further deserves every bit of financial support via PIP.

To stick with the 50 metres, as in DLA that is 164'! Are people trying to tell me that if you can walk 164' but no further you should be classified as unable to walk? Do people actually realise what 164' represents? Try thinking of the width of a football pitch! If anybody can walk that distance in my eyes there can't be that much wrong with them!

reliably, repeatedly and safely..........reliably, repeatedly and safely..........reliably, repeatedly and safely...........reliably, repeatedly and safely.

Got it now????

dori2o

tokenfield wrote: »

Absolutely right!!

20 metres is approx. 82'. For someone that can only walk that distance and nothing further deserves every bit of financial support via PIP.

To stick with the 50 metres, as in DLA that is 164'! Are people trying to tell me that if you can walk 164' but no further you should be classified as unable to walk? Do people actually realise what 164' represents? Try thinking of the width of a football pitch! If anybody can walk that distance in my eyes there can't be that much wrong with them!

I asked a question some weeks ago. What could you do if you could only walk 20m.

When you sit down and think about it, being able to walk 20m or 50m provides little benefit for that person.

Within 50m of my house I would be able to get to the sweet shop on the corner.

The bus stop is more than 50m away. The tram station is more than 50m away. To get to the doctors, to the reception for the pain clinic, to almost all departments in a hospital requires a person to walk more than 50m from the car park.

I am forced to walk more than 50m every moring and evening in order to get from my car which is parked under the building I work in, to my desk.

I don't make these journeys for fun. Every single step causes excruciating pain, even though I am taking Morphine and Ketamine and various other drugs.

As Schrodie says, it's not about how far you can walk in one go, it's about being able to walk these distances reliably, repeatedly and safely.

I can get from my car to my desk in the morning. I cannot then make that journey again for at least 3-4 hours. In fact I struggle to walk 10m after having made that initial journey.

As many genuine DLA claimants will tell you, it's hard enough getting DM's at the DWP to follow their own guidance, never mind legislation, and the 20m benchmark is likely to be interpreted as a daily limit, or a daily walking allowance, and if you dare walk more than an accumulated 20m, then you don't get the benefit.

Heres a test for you.

Spend a week where you are unable to walk any further than 50m at a time, and at the same time stab yourself in the leg with a sharp knife everytime you take a step.

Lets see exactly what you can achieve during this 'trial'.

tokenfield

schrodie wrote: »

reliably, repeatedly and safely..........reliably, repeatedly and safely..........reliably, repeatedly and safely...........reliably, repeatedly and safely.

Got it now????

50 metres is a hell of a long way. To walk that distance whether you can do it again and again isn't the point. Anybody that can walk that distance just once cannot be said to be unable to walk.


20 metres is a reasonable distance in my opinion to test their ability to walk. Beyond that it becomes ridiculous.

tokenfield

dori2o wrote: »

Spend a week where you are unable to walk any further than 50m at a time, and at the same time stab yourself in the leg with a sharp knife everytime you take a step.

Lets see exactly what you can achieve during this 'trial'.

I too find 10 metres too far without suffering extreme pain and discomfort so I improvise. I don't walk anywhere!

The car is in the integral garage, I drive with my wife, she gets out does the shopping, gets back in and we go home. Apart from that we have everything delivered to the door. Groceries, medication, papers, milk, are just a few - there is no real need to walk the 10 metres. If the car isn't there, my children pick me up.

Aids, adaptions and a change in the way you do things can solve almost any problem.

dori2o

tokenfield wrote: »

I too find 10 metres too far without suffering extreme pain and discomfort so I improvise. I don't walk anywhere!

The car is in the integral garage, I drive with my wife, she gets out does the shopping, gets back in and we go home. Apart from that we have everything delivered to the door. Groceries, medication, papers, milk, are just a few - there is no real need to walk the 10 metres. If the car isn't there, my children pick me up.

Aids, adaptions and a change in the way you do things can solve almost any problem.

That isn't living a life. It's sufferring an existance.

Plus, how do you suggest I get from my car to my desk without walking?

The clue to understanding what the disability benefits are there to provide is in the name of the benefit.

Disability Living Allowance

or

Personal Independence Payment.

The benefit is provided to help disabled people with severe mobility or care issues to live as close to a normal life as possible, and to allow them to gain/retian their own independence.

What you describe fits neither of these categories.

Obviously should the decisions be down to you only those housebound would be eligible, as anyone who dares try and live as normal a life as possible, despite their conditions, would not be entitled.

As it stands, and based on the current PIP regulations, I meet the criteria, I cannot take a single step without being in severe pain.

I can walk initially upto approx 50/55m, I then need to rest for 3 or 4 hours before attempting a similar distance.

In this time I can walk no more than 10-15m at the very most.

There is no way to know when my knee will give way beneath me. This is a regular occurrance and the end result is it leaves me sprawled out on the floor.

So there you go. Despite forcing myself to make the journey from car to desk everyday, I meet the criteria under the reliably, repeatedly and safely test.

The thing is I am not fighting these immoral changes for myself as I will be re-assessed under DLA, not PIP this time around, and it has already been proven by tribunal that I am virtually unable to walk, and my condition has deteriorated since my award was issued last January. Therefore it's entirely possible I will not be reassessed for PIP until 2015.

CTcelt1988

tokenfield wrote: »

50 metres is a hell of a long way. To walk that distance whether you can do it again and again isn't the point. Anybody that can walk that distance just once cannot be said to be unable to walk.


20 metres is a reasonable distance in my opinion to test their ability to walk. Beyond that it becomes ridiculous.

I disagree. 20m is way too short a distance. That's two bus lengths. 50m was the benchmark distance for blue badges and DLA, this gives basic walking independance. The only reason they have changed it to 20m is to deny thousands of disabled people essential support that helps them be independent.

You say people who can walk 50m just once are able to walk. If that's true, how do they walk back? You have contradicted your own answer.

tokenfield

dori2o wrote: »

That isn't living a life. It's sufferring an existance.

Plus, how do you suggest I get from my car to my desk without walking?

The clue to understanding what the disability benefits are there to provide is in the name of the benefit.

Disability Living Allowance

or

Personal Independence Payment.

The benefit is provided to help disabled people with severe mobility or care issues to live as close to a normal life as possible, and to allow them to gain/retian their own independence.

What you describe fits neither of these categories.

Obviously should the decisions be down to you only those housebound would be eligible, as anyone who dares try and live as normal a life as possible, despite their conditions, would not be entitled.

As it stands, and based on the current PIP regulations, I meet the criteria, I cannot take a single step without being in severe pain.

I can walk initially upto approx 50/55m, I then need to rest for 3 or 4 hours before attempting a similar distance.

In this time I can walk no more than 10-15m at the very most.

There is no way to know when my knee will give way beneath me. This is a regular occurrance and the end result is it leaves me sprawled out on the floor.

So there you go. Despite forcing myself to make the journey from car to desk everyday, I meet the criteria under the reliably, repeatedly and safely test.

The thing is I am not fighting these immoral changes for myself as I will be re-assessed under DLA, not PIP this time around, and it has already been proven by tribunal that I am virtually unable to walk, and my condition has deteriorated since my award was issued last January. Therefore it's entirely possible I will not be reassessed for PIP until 2015.

I wouldn't call it an existence - I would call it a change in attitude and lifestyle.

Maybe do what I did, resign your job on grounds of a disability and find another way to earn an income?

People need to take responsibility for the deterioration of their abilities due to a disability for themselves. Instead of expecting to live your life as you have done in the past - change it - adapt to the change and not expect the State to provide financial support at the first hurdle.

As I have said I receive HRM & HRC which was given entirely based on medical opinion without question. Yet, I think that if that support hadn't been there, I would have worked harder and earlier to find a way round it. As it was, boredom set in which made me evaluate what I was doing and it was then that I decided that I will not be beaten by it.

As for PIP, I don't particularly care if I am awarded anything when my turn comes in October 2015 to be assessed. If I don't get an award (which is entirely possible looking at it from a pragmatic point of view) it will not be the end of my world. It will force me to do something else to earn what I will lose - one way or another doing whatever I have to do.

Do I care really what or why PIP has been brought in - No I don't. I realise that there is a very good and valid reason why there has to be changes even only if it makes people look at themselves and take stock to think - what can I do, and not what I can't do.

As for my life - I wish I had done what I am doing now years ago - and for the first time I now believe in myself, my self worth and my abilities despite my many disabilities. Being self employed doing my own thing has given me freedom of choice and if need be freedom from benefits if I choose to go down that route.

tokenfield

CTcelt1988 wrote: »

I disagree. 20m is way too short a distance. That's two bus lengths. 50m was the benchmark distance for blue badges and DLA, this gives basic walking independance. The only reason they have changed it to 20m is to deny thousands of disabled people essential support that helps them be independent.

You say people who can walk 50m just once are able to walk. If that's true, how do they walk back? You have contradicted your own answer.

Don't be silly. The test is walking 50 metres - where does it say that you would be expected to walk another 50 metres to get back to where you started - it could be a 50 metre circle!

OF course it was the benchmark, but things have had to change. There is less money available so isn't it common sense to say that it is only fair that the most serious of the disabled will get first pickings of it?
Of course it is all to do with a reduced budget. Everyone is having to get by on a reduced budget so why is it wrong to say that the disabled should as well? You think that they should be exempt?

If so why shouldn't the hard working taxpayers be exempt from not having pay rises for years? Even our armed forces are not exempt - but hey those claiming DLA are a special case?

Get real - live in the real world of austerity.

dori2o

tokenfield wrote: »

Don't be silly. The test is walking 50 metres - where does it say that you would be expected to walk another 50 metres to get back to where you started - it could be a 50 metre circle!

OF course it was the benchmark, but things have had to change. There is less money available so isn't it common sense to say that it is only fair that the most serious of the disabled will get first pickings of it?
Of course it is all to do with a reduced budget. Everyone is having to get by on a reduced budget so why is it wrong to say that the disabled should as well? You think that they should be exempt?

If so why shouldn't the hard working taxpayers be exempt from not having pay rises for years? Even our armed forces are not exempt - but hey those claiming DLA are a special case?

Get real - live in the real world of austerity.

That is where you are wrong.

How can you possibly argue for or against something when you don't have a clear understanding about what it is you are arguing for/against.

Parva

Andy reported.