Zero points on pip claim for severe anxiety

poppy12345

Geoff1963 wrote: »

The difficulty is, that making coherent arguments, and discussing on a web forum, means you are mentally coping quite well. It's the original Catch 22 problem.

Instead of financial support because of the condition, would it be better to get support to overcome it ?

Clearly you have no experience of mental health. A lot of people that have problems with their mental health can "talk and comunicate" through writing but when it comes to face to face contact it's a totally different story!

Prinzessilein

Geoff1963 wrote: »

The difficulty is, that making coherent arguments, and discussing on a web forum, means you are mentally coping quite well. It's the original Catch 22 problem.

Instead of financial support because of the condition, would it be better to get support to overcome it ?

No ...no...and NOOOOOO!

I communicate online - sometimes...and on occasion I have been known to string together a rational and coherent argument.

However just because I am sitting at the computer right now, typing, and making some sort of sense, does not mean that I will be able to tomorrow...I may have one of my blackouts...I may have a serious headache...I may get myself into such a state of anxiety that I cannot put two words together....

The thing about the descriptors for PiP is that you have to be able to do then reliably, repeatedly, consistently, safely...otherwise you can NOT do them.

I have a number of conditions...including mental health issues....no amount of money is going to get me to 'overcome' them...what PiP does is help me to manage my life despite them.

poppy12345

Remember the PIP descriptors changed for Metal health for "following and planing a journey" I believe it's very hard to score more than 4 points in this part now, Unless it's for reasons other than psychological distress.

Alice_Holt

Prinzessilein wrote: »

No ...no...and NOOOOOO!

The thing about the descriptors for PiP is that you have to be able to do then reliably, repeatedly, consistently, safely...otherwise you can NOT do them.

Spot on.

Why people (Geoff) who know next to nothing about the benefit criteria think they can usefully comment puzzles me!
Mind you, it does amuse me that in criticising the OP for making sense, Geoff has failed to correctly read the thread and makes absolutely NO sense himself.

Dynorod

He needs to be able to manage his illness, it will never go away. Thank you for the advice and guidance. I must say that the links provided are very useful and do you know what, the decision letter and how it is worded is very distressing for him but I will make sure he is okay. For me, as I am the person supporting him, it's the blatant lies that have been recorded in the face to face consultation. May I just point out to Geoff that no day is ever the same with this illness and as his support and working full time etc there is no support for me nor a text book that says what I should do so I do the very best I can given the circumstances. I will persue the mr for him the best I can as at the assessment he did inform the assessor that he had taken tramadol just to help him through it.

Alice_Holt

Re The Decision letter.
That's a standard (and much repeated) set of words, tell him not to take it personally.
The HCP has failed to assess him correctly, and has fallen back on a set of stock (word processed - copy and post) standard generalistic ATOS / Maximus responses.

I would strongly suggest your friend seeks help from their local CAB / advice centre with the appeal.
It can be very upsetting doing it yourself. The MR will be negative (only 20% succeed), so it will be an appeal to the tribunal service. See https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5697326

Geoff1963

I think I am being misunderstood.
What I'm saying, is that it is very hard to prove one needs help, no matter how deserving, when the symptoms are so variable. In a parallel to physical disability, some people have days they can walk for miles, and other days when they cannot even stand up. A "snap inspection" by DWP would often conclude malingering.

I know of someone who walks round carrying a pair of crutches, because on odd occasions they suddenly need them. They might well qualify for disability benefit, even though they could often walk a mile to the disability assessment centre.

It is somewhat like a car crash victim who has crawled to reach A+E, being told they are clearly not that badly injured ; and would only be deserving of help, if they hadn't made it.

Muttleythefrog

Geoff1963 wrote: »

The difficulty is, that making coherent arguments, and discussing on a web forum, means you are mentally coping quite well. It's the original Catch 22 problem.

Instead of financial support because of the condition, would it be better to get support to overcome it ?

I would hope I make coherent arguments.... it's been a significant part of my life to do so... but I'm severely affected by mental illness... and get PIP and ESA as a result. That's my first point... my second point is the person in this thread isn't the claimant as is made quite clear in the opening post.

Sadly regarding your last point there may be little support out there.... they're already on medication by the sounds of it and trying to hold down a job.

On your later post.. yes perhaps misunderstood. I think I see what you meant in your earlier post and it may have been misinterpreted. I think though these assessments are just frequently very poor in accuracy and done in difficult and unusual conditions... the claimant here turned up with a supporter (the Op) and perhaps suffered in the interrogation while the Op was unable to give any key input. I suppose key now is the focus on activity descriptors and their technical interpretations while arguing through use of evidence and sound argument which ones most suitably apply. Obviously on my day of assessment for PIP at the back end of last year I did turn up to my assessment but I still was able to convince the HCP that I Cannot undertake any journey based on the infrequency of success in doing so.. might be a bit more tricky if someone is out at work most days... but there may be other avenues and surely some Daily living activities could be relevant here in addition to managing money.

In a sense your post reminds me of that adage...'there are old pilots and there are bold pilots but there are no old bold pilots'. There some disincentive in the system to being bold... to stepping out from illness... it can convey that there's a lot less wrong with you than may be true... there may be no old bold disability claimants to coin a new expression.

alexandrajj

Dynorod wrote: »

Hi, thank you both for your replies. The report from the decision maker reads as follows: you are currently prescribed a low dose of antidepressant and currently have no specialist input for your anxiety and depression..

Around here there simply is no specialist input for anxiety & depression anymore. It is all dealt with by your GP. Only psychosis etc type Illnesses are accepted by the secondary mental health services around here. My GP says I need specialist intervention and mental health services say they don't offer it to people with my diagnosis. This information was repeated to me only last week by my (very good) GP.

So basically when I come to having an assessment I'm Screwed simply because I have no Specialist input despite that 'specialist input' not being available to me? Well this all sounds fair (not).
Sounds like I'm screwed firstly by not getting the healthcare I need and secondly I'm screwed when it comes to benefits and I won't get the benefits I'm entitled to.

Muttleythefrog

alexandrajj wrote: »

Around here there simply is no specialist input for anxiety & depression anymore. It is all dealt with by your GP. Only psychosis etc type Illnesses are accepted by the secondary mental health services around here. My GP says I need specialist intervention and mental health services say they don't offer it to people with my diagnosis. This information was repeated to me only last week by my (very good) GP.

So basically when I come to having an assessment I'm Screwed simply because I have no Specialist input despite that 'specialist input' not being available to me? Well this all sounds fair (not).
Sounds like I'm screwed firstly by not getting the healthcare I need and secondly I'm screwed when it comes to benefits and I won't get the benefits I'm entitled to.

I've tended to use the phrase 'exhausted all available NHS treatment options' in my case and it seems to have successfully stuck at least with my ESA claim. At my PIP assessment the nurse started suggesting there were new drugs I could try... I dismissed her opinion out of hand..lol... explaining that I have co-existing conditions for which such interventions would need careful monitoring and then pointing out some of the drugs she mentioned as new seemed to me old... old enough for me to have tried years ago... I did wonder if she was genuinely clueless or just trying to be funny. But I wonder if that's a line to follow and potentially get some document from GP stating NHS treatment options have been either tried (or continue in the form of medication) and that x has been considered/y is not available... and so there are no further current options for treatment of ongoing problems. While medical intervention shouldn't be determining which descriptors should apply (in both ESA and PIP except obviously in relation to specifics about managing treatments) is clearly does seem to influence some to conclusions on severity of likely symptoms. For DLA I recall there was guidance in relation to diagnosed conditions and the expected level of medical involvement expected in relation to symptom severity... maybe there is still a significant chunk of thinking still floating around with these ideas.