Has anybody with ASD (adult) got DLA and what rate is normally awarded for AS? I haven't had a reply yet but my eldest's DLA was refused so now I don't hold much hope that they will grant mine.
Has anybody with ASD (adult) got DLA and what rate is normally awarded for AS? I haven't had a reply yet but my eldest's DLA was refused so now I don't hold much hope that they will grant mine.
I have to agree with openheart. DLA can be received regardless of whether you work or not, and Aspergers by its very nature is a significant disability. If it were not disabling, why would you even get diagnosed?. Aspergers is different to some conditions because it is life-long; you cannot outgrow the disability, although some issues may improve with time, but only given a stress free environment that nurtures growth.
ESA is a different benefit for those not in work, and so it should be periodically assessed, in order to ascertain whether or not the person is still incapable of work. However, assessment should take into account the needs of the individual, and should be as stress free as possible.
quote "But not everyone with Autism has care and /or mobility needs. And it's wrong to give someone benefits based on a diagnosis. Certainly when it doesn't cause them to need help."
Stranger I disagree with your comment, you are in denial, by your very diagnosis of Autism it brings restriction socially and in communication, the condition is an impairment.
If not I would love to meet someone who has been diagnosed with Autism and has no self care problems or wider issues ?
I am high functioning, but I still struggle in a lot of areas by camouflaging by autistic issues, personal hygiene, remembering to do the day to day stuff, going new places,. etc. Stuff that no one sees but those close to me.
The degree to what level the DLA payment is, should not even be under assessment, because Autism is relative. Your pain is not my pain, but pain is still pain. A flickering light or a loud noise or predictable routine life style it is all the same hell.
What are the criteria with AS to get DLA ?
Simply if you need assistance to care for yourself or for someone else to assist in the caring for you, it is too cover extra costs, normally the money gets paid back to the carer anyway(via you buying),, it is like a way for the government to pass liability back to you but give more independance to you. The money covers the extra costs of your care which can be self directed, it does not matter if you or working or not.
I believe everyone with Autism should get the benefit, even if just to pay for social aspects of the condition alone.
In reality the criteria is just a post code lottery or an Atos political Computer says no.. I say apply and keep applying, there is no logic in the government anymore, they have lost all creditiability when it comes to the welfare system, but what do you expect from the living sons of past lords and master of the past draconian plutocratic regime.
stranger said:I don't get your point / issue at all. It does ask on the ESA what adjustments you need at the face to face.
Why do you repeatedly refer to ESA? It is a different benefit. This is a thread about DLA and I have clearly stated that I am not referring to ESA in my posts.
stranger said:[quote][/quote]
Stranger & Intenseworld
That is exactly my point: you cannot expect people to undergo assessments that their disability makes them unable to do, or unablel to do reasonaly or safely. The same should apply to people who can't manage any assessment because of any disability. The assessments need to be accessible to the people who need them.
What do you suggest should happen then? Someone shouldn't be able to be on ESA for years and years with no assessment.
I've highlighted the last sentence as I think that it kind of answers the question: I am not suggesting that people should not be assessed (even once diagnosed) and have never written that, let alone that they should go for "years and years" without assessment. I have been trying to suggest that the assessments should not be of a kind that somebody's disability(ies) prevent them from coping with. That will inevitably mean assessing people with different disabilities differently. That is not discrimination: it is making reasonable adjustments for disability, which is something that employers, for a start, are legally obliged to do.
But Autism is a spectrum and many people with it are capable of holding down a full time job. If you exempt someone on the basis of their Autism, you have to exempt everyone from the assessement, else that's discrimination.
Not every Autistic person is rightly eligible for ESA. I can think of at least one person this is true for.
I haven't even mentioned ESA and this is a thread about DLA, which is a very different benefit and can be claimed regadless of whether you are working or how much you are working. I know very well that there are autistic people who can work full time: I am doing it myself (with adjustments).
Zem :)
stranger said:Not every Autistic person is rightly eligible for ESA.
Or even DLA, for that matter.
But Autism is a spectrum and many people with it are capable of holding down a full time job. If you exempt someone on the basis of their Autism, you have to exempt everyone from the assessement, else that's discrimination.
Not every Autistic person is rightly eligible for ESA. I can think of at least one person this is true for.
I think zem is maybe saying that by having a diagnosis this should give you eligibility, by virtue of the fact that having the diagnosis means you will be suffering a minimum of symptoms which make you eligible?
zem said:Stranger & Intenseworld
That is exactly my point: you cannot expect people to undergo assessments that their disability makes them unable to do, or unablel to do reasonaly or safely. The same should apply to people who can't manage any assessment because of any disability. The assessments need to be accessible to the people who need them.
What do you suggest should happen then? Someone shouldn't be able to be on ESA for years and years with no assessment.
Stranger & Intenseworld
That is exactly my point: you cannot expect people to undergo assessments that their disability makes them unable to do, or unablel to do reasonaly or safely. The same should apply to people who can't manage any assessment because of any disability. The assessments need to be accessible to the people who need them.
@zem: I believe you can ask for the ESA assessment to be carried out at home and perhaps the DLA too if they ask for one, for people with disabilities that prevent them (or make it really difficult) to attend.
zem said:[quote][/quote]
[quote]So why can no one campaign(NAS) and say certain diagnosed conditions (AUTISM) should be exempt from continous (target) assessment taking into account the condition. The pressure is too much for me.[/quote]
The problem with that is that not everyone with Autism (or most other diagnoses) is completely unable to work, and many of us do find that things improve over time, with the right support.
Should (a) a person be consigned to the scrap heap of life, and (b) the taxpayer continue to support a person that no longer needs it, simply because of that person's diagnosis?
In fact, I am on the other side of the fence altogether - I would love to get back into work, but find that there is nothing in place to meet the support I would need to do so, and so I'm left alone, by the system, to rot.
Openheart didn't seem to be asking to be exempted from any assessments: just from endless coninuous assessments.
Claiming DLA is nothing to do with whether you are working or not or are able to: DLA is supposed to account for the extra costs a person incurs in life because of a disability, and can be claimed regardless of whether you are working or not. So I don't see why the fact that not eveyone with autism is unable to work is relevant to the thread.
I don't see how even awarding somebody DLA for life would be "consigning them to the scrap heap" either: it would just be saying that they are likely to continue incurring extra costs because of their disability for life.
Are there "endless continuous assessments" for DLA?
I certainly am not being endlessly continually assessed, and I'm on DLA.
Therefore I guessed he must be talking about something else.
Appologies if I'm wrong.
Zem, you picked up my thoughts correctly, it is the psychological pressure of assessments/reassessments and stress created by them. The assessment procedure is not designed to assist vulnerable people, it is designed to put a high level psychological pressure on people, socially and economically. Any lots of questions over and over is acting as a parental psychopath and they know it.!!!!
What is zour name !
Where are zoo going !
If there is a higher plane, I HOPE with all my heart that all demons in parliment rot in pain as karma in the way they cause others.
This is not about economics, this is about the ethics of DO NO HARM !
Scorpion0x17 said:[quote]So why can no one campaign(NAS) and say certain diagnosed conditions (AUTISM) should be exempt from continous (target) assessment taking into account the condition. The pressure is too much for me.[/quote]
The problem with that is that not everyone with Autism (or most other diagnoses) is completely unable to work, and many of us do find that things improve over time, with the right support.
Should (a) a person be consigned to the scrap heap of life, and (b) the taxpayer continue to support a person that no longer needs it, simply because of that person's diagnosis?
In fact, I am on the other side of the fence altogether - I would love to get back into work, but find that there is nothing in place to meet the support I would need to do so, and so I'm left alone, by the system, to rot.
Openheart didn't seem to be asking to be exempted from any assessments: just from endless coninuous assessments.
Claiming DLA is nothing to do with whether you are working or not or are able to: DLA is supposed to account for the extra costs a person incurs in life because of a disability, and can be claimed regardless of whether you are working or not. So I don't see why the fact that not eveyone with autism is unable to work is relevant to the thread.
I don't see how even awarding somebody DLA for life would be "consigning them to the scrap heap" either: it would just be saying that they are likely to continue incurring extra costs because of their disability for life.
It is interesting there are people who want endless repeated assessments for people claiming disability benefits but when it comes to, say, driving licenses it is just assumed that everybody will be honest enough to declare any medical conditions. When I applied for my driving license I didn't have to provide any medical evidence that I was fit to do so or pass any eye test; I just had to sign to say that I could read a number plate at the required distance. I did have to do the number plate test before my driving test (over nine years ago), but since then I have just been trusted to a) get my eyes checked regularly to establish whether they had changed (one eye has altered substantially over that time), b) get different glasses if necessary, and c) tell the DVLA and surrender my license if my vision got too bad. And every 10 years it's a simple "tick and sign" to renew my license: no actual checks or even a second signature required. Of course, once I reach 75 I will have to also tick a box to say that I am still medically capable of driving. My grandpa (over 90) is still ticking this box and signing, and keeping his license, even though everybody else says that there is no way that he should be driving. Nobody is checking up on this, and somebody could be killed or seriously injured as a result (at massive cost to the taxpayer!)
What assessments there are need to be designed so that the disabled people who need the benefits can realistically cope with them, which could mean different systems for people with different kinds of diabilities. Expecting somebody with autism and OCD to go through a system that they can't cope with because of their disabilities seems a bit like asking somebody in a wheelchair to go to the second floor of a building with no lifts to do the assessment. (I know that ATOS do use buildings without wheelchair access for assessment offices though, so perhaps it's equally rubbish for everybody).
openheart said:So why can no one campaign(NAS) and say certain diagnosed conditions (AUTISM) should be exempt from continous (target) assessment taking into account the condition. The pressure is too much for me.
Because that's discrimination then. Why should certain medical conditions make someone exempt from the assessments? The pressure is also too much for people who are physically disabled and have no learning disability / mental health problem.
openheart said:So why can no one campaign(NAS) and say certain diagnosed conditions (AUTISM) should be exempt from continous (target) assessment taking into account the condition. The pressure is too much for me.
The problem with that is that not everyone with Autism (or most other diagnoses) is completely unable to work, and many of us do find that things improve over time, with the right support.
Should (a) a person be consigned to the scrap heap of life, and (b) the taxpayer continue to support a person that no longer needs it, simply because of that person's diagnosis?
In fact, I am on the other side of the fence altogether - I would love to get back into work, but find that there is nothing in place to meet the support I would need to do so, and so I'm left alone, by the system, to rot.
