"Registered Disabled"?

nannytone_2

Indie_Kid wrote: »

I know someone with a stutter. It's definitely disabling. He's so hard to understand. I am hard to understand at times too due to the way I talk.

i agree it can be disabling ... but i also dont think it makes them 'disabled'

Indie_Kid

nannytone wrote: »

i agree it can be disabling ... but i also dont think it makes them 'disabled'

So, what's the difference then?

I guess you (and confuseddotcom_) wouldn't be saying the same if you had to constantly repeat yourself, then after 3 or 4 attempts get someone else to relay for you because the other person doesn't understand you.

nannytone_2

jlawrence wrote: »

not just human but a candidate for a successful disability benefit payout. Who in their right mind is going to tell the DWP that the level of pain is no where near as bad as they say it is if it can't be proven one way or the other?
It's only human nature to play on a disability if the intended result is a large tax free monetary payment

maybe it's in your nature to do that.
many people that live with pain, get sso used to it, that they do the opposite!
they are so used to the pain being present that they start to think it is 'normal'
my sight is also a lot worse than i rea;ised. because i was so used to it being almost non existant.
it wasnt unbtil the specialist did an eye scan ( hadnt had one for about 5 years) and HE commented anout how much my condition had deteriorated.
i could have applied to get my benefits raised a long time before i did, but i held off until i NEEDED the extra money to keep me out and about.
we actually use the money to help with our disabilities.
we dont just keep it in a big pot and count it every now and then!

Indie_Kid

nannytone wrote: »

my sight is also a lot worse than i rea;ised. because i was so used to it being almost non existant.

Unlike you, I was born with my sight impairments. But like you, I didn't quite realise how bad it really was because it's normal. I didn't even realise I was colourblind (because it's always been that way) until I waas tested in 2010 and failed the tests badly.

My reading has always been a bit patchy; so tend not to notice any sight loss like that.

nannytone_2

i was born with my sight impairment too.
i had next to no peripheral sight and no night vision from birth.
id lost all of my peripheral vision by the time i was 12, and had cataracts removed in my early 30's.
until that time my central vision was intact and fairly good.
over the past 5 years, i started to lose my central vision and the quality of the sight i still had deteriorated markedly and rapidly.
i can still 'see', but i dont see clearly enough to make out any detail. i dont recognise my own family until they speak.

as for yjr differemce between 'disabling' and 'disabled'
having a broken leg is disabling... it doesnt make the person disabled.
a 'disabling condition doesnt impact on your ability to perform the essential tasks.
hygene, eating, cooking etc

Confuseddot

nannytone wrote: »

people are different. i really obhect to your 'playing the victim' comment.
cerebral palsy is a complicated consition. just because 1 twin is at mainstream uni, doesnt mean the other is 'playing the victim'! je just obviously cant manage as well.
some people cope well with pain, others are bedbound with a splinter!
just because they dont cope as well doesnt make them a 'victim' ... it makes them human!

Maybe playing the victim was the wrong phrase but there are individuals who make the most out of every situation, for example of everyone in a team at work has a cold and most people need 1 or 2 days off to recover and then there is the 1 person who has 2 weeks off no other ailments/underlying conditions.


I wasn't saying that the twin was playing the victim just that it would be unfair for the one who was in mainstream to not be classed as disabled.

nannytone_2

without a doubt there are people like that!
i wouyld think though, living your whole life like that, day in and day out would be pretty difficult,
but maybe thats why they get the video footage of people dishonestly claiming to be disabled.
ive never come across a truly disabled person that doesnt try to make the best of their situation

Richie-from-the-Boro

Indie_Kid wrote: »

For me, it's when you have a condition which affects your life in some way, which I believe is pretty much what the Equalities Act says.

For myself I define dis [ability] as what results when everyday normal living care and mobility activities can no longer be carried out by one-self.

Here is the nub of the issue the EA and DDA is variously about employment or whether or not you can get a braille version of a form from GOV, or get a wheelchair up the steps into Binns In Harrogate. The O/P's question was about ESA, PIP & IIDB transition and specifically about a register of / for the disabled.

A stammer for instance can be claimed in DDA reference employment law but the 2011 guidance on the 2010 EA is contradictory. So contradictory that neither the EAT or the HOL will use the guidance. The Employment Appeal Tribunals said the """examples that are contrasted in this guidance may be misleading""" and the """the House of Lords has declined to take such guidance into account when it comes to statutory interpretation""" So although the guidance is not an authoritative statement of the law, but that tribunals are required to take it into account where relevant, they have refused to do so. So the grind goes on until the law in the form of 'case law' then 'legislation' decides what is clearly substantial and what is clearly trivial and a statutory interpretation is laid down in law.

This eternal debate on MSE always mixes creosote and cream to come up with an answer to a question that was never asked.