To apply for DLA for DD when we have a household income of over 300k?

It's not just money, it's a clear acceptance and establishment of your DD's needs. This can be immensely helpful and can be a gateway to other things like blue badge, specialist sessions (sports, arts etc). If she is eligible, it's really her right

I think this is probably the best solution in the long term as it would provide security without, as you say, affecting entitlement in her own right.

There are no restrictions on how it should be used. DWP don’t recommend it’s saved up, because as you say, it’s meant to be used to cover the additional cost, but they don’t forbid it as such. I think OP is in a slightly different position as she can currently afford to cover the costs of her DD’s disability but is looking to the future when DD will be assessed as an adult in her own right. At the end of the day the £300,000 income is not DD’s and isn’t relevant to her own entitlement.

Care costs can mount up to very large sums and savings from a £300k salary and DLA might not touch the sides depending on the care needed, but it doesn’t have to be a choice between DD being able to claim means tested benefits/have state funded care when an adult and OP making provision for the future. Rather than savings in DD’s name, OP could look at setting up a trust which would not lead to a reduction in means tested benefits and wouldn’t be taken into account when looking at financial contributions for care.

it's supposed to be for additional costs of your DC having a disability now. Not to put away as a nest egg for the future.

It’s hard because it’s not means tested and she’s entitled so I don’t see why you shouldn’t apply. But at the same time, a majority of people who are disabled or have disabled children rely on those pip payments as a way to survive. I myself, if I didn’t have pip and due to my chronic pain preventing me from working, I wouldn’t be able to afford a car (which if I didn’t have I couldn’t leave my home) or just generally to afford my bills or live. So whilst you intend to save it for your child, most of us use it to survive. It’s a moral question I guess

I think you make a good point here. People only see a £300,000 income. They forget that it’s not DD’s own income so it’s irrelevant to disability benefits (which are not means tested anyway) and will be irrelevant for her DD’s care needs when she is an adult. But if OP facilitates savings from that income and any disability benefits, which take DD over the limit she will be denied income related benefits and will have to contribute to her own care until she gets under the threshold. If she has no savings she will get benefit support, but would be reliant on the state for care, and as we know, the care system is under huge strain. So OP l think is trying to land somewhere in between and looking at future needs and support, which will be easier to access if eligibility is established as early as possible. She’s damned if she does and damned if she doesn’t.

You have two choices,
first is you save as much as possible where her care is paid for hopefully for the rest of her life with private housing, private carers

second is you dont and she is them looked after by the state in the way of carers, housing and benefits.

you cant do both. Like a previous op says, if you have more than £16k of savings, you’re entitled to nothing in the way of benefits

My daughter is trying to get DLA for my grandson, they don't need the money but HE WILL need help later in life and this gives a good benchmark of his needs

How ignorant. Caring for a disabled child who needs significant care in excess of what non-disabled peers the same age need is nothing like caring for a non-disabled child. Unpaid carers, including unpaid parent carers, save the state a fortune.

Exactly. Unpaid carers are the backbone of this country and are largely ignored by government. Those advocating stopping or means testing disability benefits have no idea how much it would cost to replace these benefits with the services needed to meet the needs they fulfill.

I have friends who have had to give up work because of their children's needs.

What exactly should they live on? Meanwhile they're saving the country millions.

You don’t have disabled children do you ? No ? Thought not. If you had you wouldn’t have posted the way you did. You clearly don’t understand what these disability benefits are paid for, so maybe be thankful for that and don’t criticise from a position of ignorance.

What a horrible comment. Did you not read any of the thread before commenting ? If you had, you’d realise that these benefits are not paid for ‘looking after their own kids’, but are to address the huge extra cost of living with a disabilty. There are detailed explanations here as to the intentions of these benefits, so why would you come here and make such an ignorant post when all the information you need is literally a scroll away ? You clearly have no experience of disability so why post about something you so clearly know nothing about ?

So. Despite 21 pages of information as to why people get these benefits, including input from professional disability advocates, you decide to disregard all that to come on here and make a totally irrelevant and ignorant post. Well done. You clearly have no experience of disabilty or the huge related costs, so why are you even here ?

disability benefits are for the added on costs if living. Many parents of disabled children are pushed out of employment as there is virtually no wrap around and school holiday childcare. plus a lot of children with disabilities are not in school as there are nowhere near enough school places in specialist settings. It's a completely different ballgame to having non- ,disabled children where parents can easily stay in employment and and advance their careers. What do you suggest parents who cannot work due to caring responsibilities and a complete lack of support by social care are supposed to live in if employment isn't a option? Starve?

Well you are privileged then. Count your "blessings "

I’ve never really understood why people would get benefits for looking after their own kids. It’s not like they’re an adult & not able to work because of this, or one who has no one to care for them.

How on earth can you possibly say with any certainty that they do not qualify for the enhanced rates ? Do you live with them 24 hours a day ? Are you privy to their medical history ? Have you seen their benefit claim and what the decision to award benefit is based on ? If not then you’re making hugely ableist assumptions based only on what you can see. A lot of disability includes hidden, and often embarrassing or intimate difficulties.

And having anxiety doesn’t mean you have to live like a hermit. These benefits are paid so that disabled people can enjoy life on the same terms as their able bodied counterparts. No disability assessor would take it on trust that an anxiety condition means you cannot leave the house, ever. There may be times when they genuinely can’t leave the house, or they can’t do it alone, and if that’s over 50% of the time, then they qualify.

Anxiety and depression conditions generally don’t qualify for PIP, especially at the higher rates, (which are reserved for the most substantially disabled) unless they are being treated via second line consultant led mental health care. So I would suggest that your daughters’ friend has quite a severe level of disability and to qualify for the enhanced rates she would have to have provided clear proof of that.

I’ve no idea how . But I personally know two people that get enhanced rates on pip that absolutely do not qualify for it. Yet I know people that are having to fight tooth and nail when their lives are already very difficult. My daughter’s friend gets pip for anxiety, completely valid reason but she’s out every weekend with the other girls clubbing but says she can’t leave the house due to being anxious . I just don’t see how if you’re that anxious you can go 9nto a busy nightclub but can’t go out to the shops or even for a walk !

My own son who is severely autistic and has severe learning disabilities when we swapped from DLA to pip I didn’t have to provide much in the way of evidence, I did take him for a face to face though which was actually really good as within a few minutes the assessor could see for herself ! When we applied for DLA I couldn’t have had much in the way of evidence as he was only young so can’t remember what I provided now it was a long time ago. He does get enhanced rate for both and UC but by the time he’s paid his client contribution towards his care package he’s left with £30 a week or thereabouts so even though he’s 25 years old we still have to support him financially so he can lead a full and active life!

This thread is a real eye opener as to the ignorance and prejudice surrounding disability benefits isn’t it ? Glib suggestions implying that parents of disabled children who don’t work are either not job ready or somehow workshy. No thought of how long and hard they work to meet the needs of their children, or of how even working a few hours may affect the essential benefits they claim.

Those of us who have worked within the system know how difficult it is to claim disability benefits, and how expensive it is to live with disability. It’s far from the walk in the park that some here seem to think. I was particularly disgusted when a poster upthread who described themselves as severely disabled was attacked for milking the system by another poster who had previously advocated for all those eligible to make sure they claim !! And there are always those who know someone who shouldn’t be claiming. Well unless you live with that person and know every aspect of their condition, and are privy to all the confidential medical evidence and other details of their claim, actually no you don’t. You’re making an assumption based on what you see, not what may be there and hidden, and frankly none of your business.

Disability benefits are designed to make life easier for disabled people. They are, rightly in my opinion, universal, because disability is universal and still costly whatever your income. And l think what a lot of people who cite the ballooning and ‘unsustainable’ disability benefits bill are forgetting is that a significant part of the cost is eaten up by claimants having to go to expensive tribunals to get a fair decision. Rather than means testing we should be improving the quality of the decision making so that claimants get a fair decision first time round. Their lives are already difficult and the present system of assessment just makes it even more so.

And there is already a built in means test to disability benefits - the assessment itself. It assesses the need based on the level of disability, and that’s the only thing that’s relevant. If we start means testing according to income, people in need will lose out on substantial support if they are even a pound or two over the inevitably low thresholds. How do you tell a disabled person who is just over the threshold they don’t qualify even though they have the same level of disability and the same extra disability related expense as someone else who is just under the threshold ? How do you decide where that cut off point comes ?

To return to the original question. I believe the OP should claim. Those here who are telling her she’s depriving someone else by doing so need to remember one thing. OP and her partner will be paying well over £100,000 in annual tax and NI. The top rate of child DLA is a little under £10,000 annually. So at present rates it would take over ten years of claiming DLA to take out of the system what they pay into it in a single year. If we expect high earners to contribute to the provision of these benefits for others, there is no reason on earth we should be barring them from claiming them themselves as and when the need arises.

This. 100%

I came across this situation a lot. Happens with both physical and mental health/neurodivergence. Assessors are not necessarily familiar with the conditions they are being asked to assess. They are health professionals such as nurses, physios and paramedics (but not doctors) who are given minimal training and referred to as ‘disability analysts’. It’s a one size fits all assessment and it’s been roundly condemned as unfit for purpose.

The assessor doesn’t make the decision on benefit, they provide a report to the DWP decision maker in which they give an opinion as to which descriptor best fits the claimant for each activity assessed. It’s these descriptors which determine the points awarded, and the overall number of points determines eligibility. The decision maker also has any other medical evidence the claimant provides, but in my experience they will always defer to the assessors’ report.

l’ve seen cases at appeal tribunal where DWP have been criticised for using assessors’ reports which directly contradict medical evidence provided by the claimant from specialists treating them, and the claimant has wrongly been denied benefit as a result. Some of the decisions are so bad that the chief of the tribunal service has suggested the introduction of fines for DWP to try to improve the quality of the decision making, because tribunal seems to be the only way some claimants can get a fair decision.

The numbers of appeal tribunals has soared since PIP was introduced and the majority of claimants are successful. But tribunals are expensive and the increased use of them to get a fair decision is a significant part of the hugely increased disability benefits bill.

The mandatory reconsideration and appeal process is difficult and stressful and in my experience it tends to be mainly those with mental health conditions/neurodivergence who decide not to go to tribunal because it’s just too much to cope with. My own opinion is that the DWP are aware of this - its benefit savings by the back door.

l’ve extensive experience of assisting with PIP applications so if you would like to try again l’d be happy to help if l can. Just PM me.

I don't need to get used to working or have some 'course' to get me into the habit of getting up each day. I'm a solicitor who has been unable to work for a while now due to the severity of my son's needs. Would I prefer to have a child who was able to function in the world and then I could continue on with my career? Of course. DLA does not even touch the sides of the added expenses due to his needs. Never mind the impact on the family finances of me giving up work.

There must be parents of disabled children who cannot get even part time employment. If Sir Keir is serious, and his electioneering was truthful, then he should ensure that parents can go out to work and be able to socialise with others while they are on social security benefit, not only to benefit themselves, but be able to help their children to socialise. Perhaps he could start courses similar to the TOPS courses, which were 9-5 and students were paid a wage to study. Not only did they study for employment qualifications, but it got them used to getting up and going to work in the morning and coming home at night.

parents of disabled children do not meed to get used to working again. Many are already working 50/60/70...h per week. As to the 9-5 courses. You know that school is roughly 9-3 and there is usually no wrap around childcare for children with complex needs and don't get me started on the school hols when our DC are completely excluded from any sort of holiday club. How is this all going to work?

carers allowance needs increasing to make it livable on. We save the state £££ because we are forced by a non existent social care model into slave labour. we work. Harder than most.