Mobility element of DLA

Tiesandflies_2

Hi there,

I'm just posting to ask for a little bit of advice with regards to my daughter. My daughter will be three in January. She currently receives the middle rate care rate for her disability. We have obviously not been able to apply for the mobility element for her until she is three.

My daughter has cerebral palsy, and more specifically right sided Hemiplegia. This obviously affects her walking. She walks with a severe limp as her right leg doesn't function that well. She falls over often too due to the nature of her disability. It is harder for her to get back up because her right arm is affected too and can't really use it. All this affects the distance she can walk and she usually wants carried after not very far due to it being uncomfortable and sore. She wears a splint on her leg too - but at the current time she has a plaster cast on for 8 weeks to try and help. She receives Botox injections in her leg every 6 to 12 months. She also visits a physiotherapist every so often to help with stretches etc.

During an MRI scan, a condition was picked up which I forget the name of. It's on the forms that I've sent off for her mobility application. Basically she is unable to see obstacles nearby such as steps and falls or trips over them.

Whilst reading the criteria for mobility help I basically read it as someone virtually has to be completely unable to walk. I would be lying to say she is completely unable to walk. She can walk but not too far. Definitely below 50 metres.

Is it likely for her to qualify for the mobility element?

Thanks in advance.

rogerblack

Tiesandflies wrote: »

Whilst reading the criteria for mobility help I basically read it as someone virtually has to be completely unable to walk. I would be lying to say she is completely unable to walk. She can walk but not too far. Definitely below 50 metres.

Virtually unable to walk does not mean "virtually unable to walk".
It means "meeting the criteria for being virtually unable to walk according to the DLA law, regulations, and caselaw'.

It is a very complex area.

In short - being able to walk a distance only when in severe discomfort, or if her life is limited by only being able to do that occasionally may count as being virtually unable to walk.

DLA is not paid on the basis that the claimant should sit in a chair all the time, but so as to look at what problems they have with their body if they were to attempt to live a normal life.

To quote from a decision of the house of lords in one case (that now forms part of the law).

The basic test is reasonableness. Attention must ‘be reasonably required both in its purpose and in its frequency.’ 
The circumstances in which the attention must be required extend beyond what is ‘essential or necessary for life. … The test, in my view, is whether the attention is reasonably required to enable the severely disabled person as far as reasonably possible to live a normal life. He is not to be confined to doing only the things which totally deaf (or blind) people can do and provided with only such attention as keeps him alive in such a community.’ 
What is the scope of a normal life? ‘Social life in the sense of mixing with others, taking part in activities with others, undertaking recreation and cultural activities can be part of normal life. It is not in any way unreasonable that the severely disabled person should wish to be involved in them despite his disability.’


The above is in the case of a deaf/blind claimant - but it applies to everyone. The test as to if they can manage is not seeing if they can struggle once or twice to manage walking a distance, but if the manner in which they walk, and the speed, significantly limit their life compared to a normal person.

There are no hard-and-fast distance limits in DLA at which this applies, distances are guidelines only.

PIP changes this in some ways - but the baseline remains the same.
The question is not 'can stand and move unaided more than 20m, but less than 50m unaided'.

It is 'can as and when reasonably required in life if the claimant were fit, reliably, safely and to an acceptable standard, on most days, at more than half the speed of a normal person stand and move unaided more than 20m but less than 50m unaided'.

Tiesandflies_2

Thanks for taking the time to provide such a detailed reply. I feel I have a better understanding of it all now.

I remain hopeful for my daughter then. She's a marvellous trier but it does get difficult for her.

Thank again for your reply.

Tiesandflies_2

Well I phoned check up on the application and my daughter has been rejected the mobility element.

I thought having cerebral palsy/right sided Hemiplegia with difficulty walking distances would qualify but alas has not.

Is it worth appealing?

CTcelt1988

Yes, you should definitely appeal. Your daughter should definitely get PIP.

suziequ

Tiesandflies wrote: »

I thought having cerebral palsy/right sided Hemiplegia with difficulty walking distances would qualify but alas has not.

My son has cerebral palsy is now 24, from 3 years old to 21 years old, he had high rate mobility. Then on re applying he was awarded low rate mobility.

So no its not guaranteed even if you have cerebral palsy :(

merlin68

That might be why they turned you down, if shes not three till January.

Tiesandflies_2

I assumed they automatically sent us out the forms due to the fact she was approaching 3 years old in January.

I'm definitely considering appealing. Even Just to know on what reasons she was declined.

What is involved in the appeal process? Do I just phone up and say I disagree with their decision?

Tigsteroonie

I believe that you firstly ask for a reconsideration, before then going to full appeal.

Is there any guidance on Scope's website with regards to how to write a DLA application? I know when we were applying for our autistic son, I found the guidance on Cerebra's website very useful; Scope might have similar for children with CP.

I must admit to finding the Medical Guidance for DLA Decision Makers pdf rather informative ...

jak

My son gets lower rate mobility and he is autistic. It's because he needs support outside due to running across roads etc. Physically he can walk but not reliably. It's worth a reconsideration tbh. Have you got your gp to write a letter? That may help x