Yes, of their cognitive development, which is medical evidence. I didn't say they were medically qualified, in fact I said the exact reverse, so you might want to read again.
Which indicates a medical condition of some sort, if it's severe enough to warrant DLA, whether you have a name for it yet or not.
TBH, you seem to be getting stuck on some definitions here, making you think itseasier to claim for some than is the reality.
I'm not getting stuck on anything. I have pointed out you don't need medical evidence or a medical condition to claim DLA.
You have suggested that I don't know what I am talking about and are now suggesting school evidence is medical evidence.
If your child is statemented you would understand that only evidence from a medical expert can be classed as medical evidence and a medical condition can only be given by a qualified medical expert
I'm not getting stuck on anything. I have pointed out you don't need medical evidence or a medical condition to claim DLA.
Whereas I think you are, have explained why, and why I find you claim to be flawed. The only way to go from here is in circles.
(except to say originally you didn't make clear you meant only legally-defined medical evidence, and not the more generic "medical evidence" meaning evidence relating to your medical condition)
Nope and I don't care who she dates. However you conveniently forgot the rest of what i said which was that she is not qualified for the job.
i believe a Minister for the Disabled, should be someone disabled, or at least trained in knowing the needs of disabled people, like a disability social worker
i believe a Minister for the Disabled, should be someone disabled, or at least trained in knowing the needs of disabled people, like a disability social worker
Whereas I think you are, have explained why, and why I find you claim to be flawed. The only way to go from here is in circles.
(except to say originally you didn't make clear you meant only legally-defined medical evidence, and not the more generic "medical evidence" meaning evidence relating to your medical condition)
You should have found out the meaning of medical evidence before suggesting I was lying
i believe a Minister for the Disabled, should be someone disabled, or at least trained in knowing the needs of disabled people, like a disability social worker
No it doesn't Cameron could say he knows the needs of the disabled after having a disabled child and claiming DLA, would anyone with ant sense trust him?
I truly don't understand why some group/groups haven't taken legal action.
If someone has been given a lifetime award and nothing has changed how is it legal what they are doing?
Its going to push more people into seeking help from Social services them providing care or even having to put people into a care system a total false economy.
some of the major Charities are to blame for this farce most held fire when the white/green paper were being talked about it was only just before it became law they finally started to raise doubts and by that time it was over.
Only history will be the judge But Lord Fraud I think is going to be dammed for a very long time his entire opinions of people ill/Disabled are shocking and Labour are the ones who gave that guy the power to start putting ideas forward and when they didn't like a lot he jumped ship over to the Tories.
EX-LEPER: All right, sir. My final offer: half a shekel for an old ex-leper.
BRIAN: Did you say... 'ex-leper'?
EX-LEPER: That's right, sir. Sixteen years behind the bell, and proud of it, sir.
BRIAN: Well, what happened?
EX-LEPER: I was cured, sir.
BRIAN: Cured?
EX-LEPER: Yes, sir, a bloody miracle, sir. God bless you.
BRIAN: Who cured you?
EX-LEPER: Esther did, sir. I was hopping along, minding my own business. All of a sudden, up she comes. Cures me. One minute I'm a leper with a trade, next minute my livelihood's gone. Not so much as a by your leave. 'You're cured mate.'.... Bloody do-gooder.
And it will be a sad day when working DLA claimants have to give up work because they dont fit the new rules for PIP and lose there car or payments that enable them to get to work.
i believe a Minister for the Disabledshould be someone disabled,, or at least trained in knowing the needs of disabled people, like a disability social worker
You want to discriminate against able-bodied people?
Imagine the uproar on here if I suggested a minister for sport should be free of any disabilities.
As far as I'm aware DLA is changing for people over 16 next week and people will be need to be medically examined to claim it
Current claimants do not need an examination as I'm aware.
DLA is only being abolished for working age people (ie the only group where claimant numbers have dropped over the last year, and the group which forms just 8% of the increase in claimant numbers since the coalition came to power).
Current claimants will undergo the same medical assessment procedure as new claimants. Those with an indefinite award will be migrated from 2015 unless they report a change in circumstances. McVey said that a face to face assessment will not be required in about 25% of cases.
You want to discriminate against able-bodied people?
Imagine the uproar on here if I suggested a minister for sport should be free of any disabilities.
Well i would love every able-bodied person, manage for a week in a wheelchair and see from that point of veiw the kind of everyday problems that someone has to deal with
DLA is only being abolished for working age people (ie the only group where claimant numbers have dropped over the last year, and the group which forms just 8% of the increase in claimant numbers since the coalition came to power).
Current claimants will undergo the same medical assessment procedure as new claimants. Those with an indefinite award will be migrated from 2015 unless they report a change in circumstances. McVey said that a face to face assessment will not be required in about 25% of cases.
Just seen this thread
My neighbour is 58 and has Parkinsons, he had a lifetime award (he showed me the letter) but when a letter came for him recently it said indefinately
why have they changed it
I would think a lot of people have planned for their future around the fact they had been awarded certain benefits for life
My neighbour is 58 and has Parkinsons, he had a lifetime award (he showed me the letter) but when a letter came for him recently it said indefinately
why have they changed it
I would think a lot of people have planned for their future around the fact they had been awarded certain benefits for life
I certainly dont know what to tell him
Lifetime awards were changed to "indefinite" awards about 5 years ago. I think they changed it to make it easier to reduce the claimant count at some point in the future.
He should not have to undergo the migration to PIP until 2015 (unless he reports a change in circumstances), and it could then be anytime up until 2018.
I would advise that he collects as much medical evidence as possible in preparation for the migration. Every time I see my neurologist (or orthopaedic surgeon/occupational therapist/wheelchair services etc), I ask them to copy me in on any letters they write to my gp so that I can put them with my claim form.
I had so much medical evidence that I was recently migrated from IB to ESA and into the Support Group without undergoing an Atos assessment.
The other thing that I would advise is checking out the new PIP descriptors as that will be what is used to determine eligibility on migration from DLA. See:
You should have found out the meaning of medical evidence before suggesting I was lying
I was suggesting you were wrong, not lying. And you were; you said you didn't need to have a medical condition. You do, the condition causing additional needs. What you don't need is a diagnosis.
Regarding medical evidence, you are only using the narrower definition to try and give the impression that it's easier to claim than it is, which is misleading.
I was suggesting you were wrong, not lying. And you were; you said you didn't need to have a medical condition. You do, the condition causing additional needs. What you don't need is a diagnosis.
Regarding medical evidence, you are only using the narrower definition to try and give the impression that it's easier to claim than it is, which is misleading.
To suffer from a medical condition it will need to be diagnosed. Regarding your second point there is no narrower definition of medical. Its pretty simple medical evidence is evidence provided by a medically qualified person.
Additional needs in itself is not a medical condition. Some people additional needs can be caused by a medical condition.
To suffer from a medical condition it will need to be diagnosed. Regarding your second point there is no narrower definition of medical. Its pretty simple medical evidence is evidence provided by a medically qualified person.
Additional needs in itself is not a medical condition. Some people additional needs can be caused by a medical condition.
I have M.E. it cannot be diagnosed because it is simply the absence of anything else that can cause my debilitating condition. It still is a medical condition though.
To suffer from a medical condition it will need to be diagnosed.
It may not have a diagnosis and still be under investigation. The person's care needs don't appear with diagnosis, but because they have a medical condition.
"Additional needs" is indeed not a condition, but a description of impact of the condition. If they didn't have the condition, they'd not have those additional needs: thus to get DLA you must have a condition that causes additional needs, whether or not it has a diagnosis.
I live just over the river from this Daughter of a B!tch, and this is the only marginal seat in my region. This alone will probably motivate me to go and knock on doors to get this moo kicked out of the House.
Lifetime awards were changed to "indefinite" awards about 5 years ago. I think they changed it to make it easier to reduce the claimant count at some point in the future.
He should not have to undergo the migration to PIP until 2015 (unless he reports a change in circumstances), and it could then be anytime up until 2018.
I would advise that he collects as much medical evidence as possible in preparation for the migration. Every time I see my neurologist (or orthopaedic surgeon/occupational therapist/wheelchair services etc), I ask them to copy me in on any letters they write to my gp so that I can put them with my claim form.
I had so much medical evidence that I was recently migrated from IB to ESA and into the Support Group without undergoing an Atos assessment.
The other thing that I would advise is checking out the new PIP descriptors as that will be what is used to determine eligibility on migration from DLA. See:
The problem seems to be that, even if its blindingly obvious that someone belongs in the support group just from the diagnosis on file, they still seem to be sending another form out a year later. I don't know if its because they expect a miracle cure, or they are just incompetent, or they get paid for every unnecessary reassessment? I suspect its just so that the government can't be accused of leaving people unchecked - even if the diagnosis tells them that miracles only will change the condition.
I have M.E. it cannot be diagnosed because it is simply the absence of anything else that can cause my debilitating condition. It still is a medical condition though.
Who diagnosed you with your condition? All chronic pain type syndromes will have to be diagnosed by a medical expert.
It may not have a diagnosis and still be under investigation. The person's care needs don't appear with diagnosis, but because they have a medical condition.
"Additional needs" is indeed not a condition, but a description of impact of the condition. If they didn't have the condition, they'd not have those additional needs: thus to get DLA you must have a condition that causes additional needs, whether or not it has a diagnosis.
Your condition is not a medical condition until it is diagnosed. Therefore as I pointed out the person who suggested that you needed a medical assessment to apply for DLA this not true and you do not need a medical condition or medical evidence to support this.
It seems your problem is understanding the meaning of medical evidence and medical condition which are not the same as evidence or condition.
If you ask some for evidence to support a condition then as you say you do not evidence from a qualified expert.
If you ask for medical evidence to support a medical condition then you will need evidence from a medically qualified person and its not that hard to understand
You want to discriminate against able-bodied people?
Imagine the uproar on here if I suggested a minister for sport should be free of any disabilities.
It is no different to suggestion a minister for business should have some experience of working in business or a defence secretary have a connection in that area
Personal experience can be really helpful and I have noticed some non disabled (yet!) are particularly clueless about disability
Comments
I'm not getting stuck on anything. I have pointed out you don't need medical evidence or a medical condition to claim DLA.
You have suggested that I don't know what I am talking about and are now suggesting school evidence is medical evidence.
If your child is statemented you would understand that only evidence from a medical expert can be classed as medical evidence and a medical condition can only be given by a qualified medical expert
Whereas I think you are, have explained why, and why I find you claim to be flawed. The only way to go from here is in circles.
(except to say originally you didn't make clear you meant only legally-defined medical evidence, and not the more generic "medical evidence" meaning evidence relating to your medical condition)
i believe a Minister for the Disabled, should be someone disabled, or at least trained in knowing the needs of disabled people, like a disability social worker
that sounds like a good idea
You should have found out the meaning of medical evidence before suggesting I was lying
No it doesn't Cameron could say he knows the needs of the disabled after having a disabled child and claiming DLA, would anyone with ant sense trust him?
If someone has been given a lifetime award and nothing has changed how is it legal what they are doing?
Its going to push more people into seeking help from Social services them providing care or even having to put people into a care system a total false economy.
some of the major Charities are to blame for this farce most held fire when the white/green paper were being talked about it was only just before it became law they finally started to raise doubts and by that time it was over.
Only history will be the judge But Lord Fraud I think is going to be dammed for a very long time his entire opinions of people ill/Disabled are shocking and Labour are the ones who gave that guy the power to start putting ideas forward and when they didn't like a lot he jumped ship over to the Tories.
As far as I'm aware DLA is changing for people over 16 next week and people will be need to be medically examined to claim it
Current claimants do not need an examination as I'm aware.
BRIAN: Did you say... 'ex-leper'?
EX-LEPER: That's right, sir. Sixteen years behind the bell, and proud of it, sir.
BRIAN: Well, what happened?
EX-LEPER: I was cured, sir.
BRIAN: Cured?
EX-LEPER: Yes, sir, a bloody miracle, sir. God bless you.
BRIAN: Who cured you?
EX-LEPER: Esther did, sir. I was hopping along, minding my own business. All of a sudden, up she comes. Cures me. One minute I'm a leper with a trade, next minute my livelihood's gone. Not so much as a by your leave. 'You're cured mate.'.... Bloody do-gooder.
You want to discriminate against able-bodied people?
Imagine the uproar on here if I suggested a minister for sport should be free of any disabilities.
DLA is only being abolished for working age people (ie the only group where claimant numbers have dropped over the last year, and the group which forms just 8% of the increase in claimant numbers since the coalition came to power).
Current claimants will undergo the same medical assessment procedure as new claimants. Those with an indefinite award will be migrated from 2015 unless they report a change in circumstances. McVey said that a face to face assessment will not be required in about 25% of cases.
Well i would love every able-bodied person, manage for a week in a wheelchair and see from that point of veiw the kind of everyday problems that someone has to deal with
My neighbour is 58 and has Parkinsons, he had a lifetime award (he showed me the letter) but when a letter came for him recently it said indefinately
why have they changed it
I would think a lot of people have planned for their future around the fact they had been awarded certain benefits for life
I certainly dont know what to tell him
Tell him not to worry.
Lifetime awards were changed to "indefinite" awards about 5 years ago. I think they changed it to make it easier to reduce the claimant count at some point in the future.
He should not have to undergo the migration to PIP until 2015 (unless he reports a change in circumstances), and it could then be anytime up until 2018.
I would advise that he collects as much medical evidence as possible in preparation for the migration. Every time I see my neurologist (or orthopaedic surgeon/occupational therapist/wheelchair services etc), I ask them to copy me in on any letters they write to my gp so that I can put them with my claim form.
I had so much medical evidence that I was recently migrated from IB to ESA and into the Support Group without undergoing an Atos assessment.
The other thing that I would advise is checking out the new PIP descriptors as that will be what is used to determine eligibility on migration from DLA. See:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pip-assessment-thresholds-and-consultation-response.pdf
From page 57 onwards.
I was suggesting you were wrong, not lying. And you were; you said you didn't need to have a medical condition. You do, the condition causing additional needs. What you don't need is a diagnosis.
Regarding medical evidence, you are only using the narrower definition to try and give the impression that it's easier to claim than it is, which is misleading.
To suffer from a medical condition it will need to be diagnosed. Regarding your second point there is no narrower definition of medical. Its pretty simple medical evidence is evidence provided by a medically qualified person.
Additional needs in itself is not a medical condition. Some people additional needs can be caused by a medical condition.
I have M.E. it cannot be diagnosed because it is simply the absence of anything else that can cause my debilitating condition. It still is a medical condition though.
It may not have a diagnosis and still be under investigation. The person's care needs don't appear with diagnosis, but because they have a medical condition.
"Additional needs" is indeed not a condition, but a description of impact of the condition. If they didn't have the condition, they'd not have those additional needs: thus to get DLA you must have a condition that causes additional needs, whether or not it has a diagnosis.
The problem seems to be that, even if its blindingly obvious that someone belongs in the support group just from the diagnosis on file, they still seem to be sending another form out a year later. I don't know if its because they expect a miracle cure, or they are just incompetent, or they get paid for every unnecessary reassessment? I suspect its just so that the government can't be accused of leaving people unchecked - even if the diagnosis tells them that miracles only will change the condition.
Who diagnosed you with your condition? All chronic pain type syndromes will have to be diagnosed by a medical expert.
Your condition is not a medical condition until it is diagnosed. Therefore as I pointed out the person who suggested that you needed a medical assessment to apply for DLA this not true and you do not need a medical condition or medical evidence to support this.
It seems your problem is understanding the meaning of medical evidence and medical condition which are not the same as evidence or condition.
If you ask some for evidence to support a condition then as you say you do not evidence from a qualified expert.
If you ask for medical evidence to support a medical condition then you will need evidence from a medically qualified person and its not that hard to understand
It is no different to suggestion a minister for business should have some experience of working in business or a defence secretary have a connection in that area
Personal experience can be really helpful and I have noticed some non disabled (yet!) are particularly clueless about disability