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

[Milesandmilesandmiles]

Just that really - we have an autistic daughter who needs support with most things (although is in mainstream school). Between us DH and I earn over 300k, so we don’t need the money. However, conscious that we won’t be around for ever and we could save it for DD’s needs as she grows. But is this what state benefits are for?

The two allowances - pension/family credit and DLA/PIP are completely different. You get disability benefit because you need it. If you are already on pension credit and are disabled, you can get DLA/PIP.

DLA is only payable to children under the age of 16. There are a few people claiming it as a legacy benefit because they were over the age limit to be migrated to PIP, but there are no new adult claims. And eligibility for PIP stops at age 66 unless you are already claiming it. The only disability benefit that can be claimed at pension age is attendance allowance, which is a maximum of £104 a week for daily living help and does not have a mobility component. Increased pension credit is payable for anyone eligible who is claiming higher rate AA

And your point would be………….?

It would take me all day and it’s all out there for you to look yourself. Vast sums of money wasted on government projects like HS2, huge amounts wasted on PPE unfit for purpose during the pandemic and still costing the tax payer a fortune to store, Covid loans to fraudsters which can never be recovered, waste and mismanagement within the NHS. The list is endless and well in the public domain.

You pay tax and on that income, the tax will massively outweigh what you get back. So I would apply for it.

It's also true that you still get to use other state-funded services like libraries, street lights etc so why not this one?

Also some benefits are "gateways" to other funding and help, so it might be more about the fact you get it, than the ££ itself.

He claimed for his son.

But when he was in government he only took the MP salary, he didn't take the enhanced payments for being Prime Minister.

Anyway his wife is/was loaded as well, it wasn't just him.

And far more than the OP's family income, too!

Some families, however, don’t need it for that because their circumstances are different.

But it’s not for you or anyone else to judge. It would be very unusual for a family with a disabled child not to incur additional expense. Most families with disabled children can make good use of the money.

DLA does not guarantee PIP or even make it more likely. Each individual is assessed afresh at the time.

No but once you’ve gathered the evidence and completed the forms it’s much easier to update at renewal. The first time is always the hardest (based on having done several DLA and EHCP renewals). And should we not be around when he’s older, it’ll be much easier for his brothers to help him if they don’t have to start from scratch.

I think it’s helpful to remind ourselves of how lucky our children are.

I think the people who need to remember how lucky they are, are the ones on this thread that were lucky enough to be born healthy but begrudge a disabled child a few pounds a week.

We are in the same boat and I see it as a tax rebate . As you know we pay way more in to the system that £400 a month so I see that I've paid it already and I'm just taking back the tax 🤷‍♀️

Yes, because it will open doors for her later on. She won't be earning massive amounts of money and if it may mean she can access other services. I saved up my son's and he used it to pay for specialised driving lessons which means he could then get himself to and from work.

The idea that anyone ever got richer by having a disabled child is just laughable.

For all those advocating means testing. Disability benefits are universal benefits because disability is universal, regardless of the means available. Means testing according to income is a race to the bottom and will always leave someone in need ineligible because thresholds are inevitably set low and people end up missing out on substantial support for the sake of a few pounds over the limit.

Income is not a factor and nor should it be. Rich disabled people are the exception, not the rule. How do you means test a benefit meant to cover extra cost, which in a lot of cases is unquantifiable ? And anyone who has undertaken the exhausting and humiliating task of applying for these benefits themselves will know that the process itself acts as a means test because the bar of eligibility is set very high. That’s why no government will apply any other form of means test.

Claim it OP. You need to think ahead. There is a reason it is non means tested. She needs the money. Your circumstances may well change in the future and you wont be on the same money. She needs it for when you are not around. I would be claiming it and saving it into a SIPP and a S & S ISA for her that she can access when you are not around. Also think about being an appointee for her when she moves to PIP and deputyship if she cannot manage her finances. When she retires she may only be able to access state pension and who know s what small amount that will be. Think very long term think about how she will be supporting herself when you are both gone and channel money towards that time.

It’s really not. It’s offensive and indefensible - and l suspect that poster knows it.

Yes, you should claim. The earlier you get her in to the system, the easier it will be as she gets older. You can always make sure you use it for therapy, a PA or similar for her. Don’t save it - once she’s an adult she’ll be penalized for having savings, get advice on trusts etc as she gets towards 18.

What I was going to say! Use it for anything that will help your child.

Spot on. Disability should be the only qualification needed for disability benefits. And for all those mealy mouthed posters telling OP she’s depriving others of benefit by claiming (as if), you might want to consider that OP and her partner will be paying well over £100,000 a year in tax and NI - the maximum annual rate of DLA is currently £9,583.60 a year. Are you really saying that high earners who contribute to the payment of these benefits to others shouldn’t claim it themselves if they’re entitled to do so to benefit their child ? Because of some bizarre perceived moral issue ? It’s batshit.

Of course you should claim for your daughter. As PPs have said, it's a gateway that will let her access targeted help and services in the future. Anyone thinking it's somehow moral to deny her this just because you've got a few quid is ableist.

Dear god some of the comments on here. The hatred towards ND kids on here these days makes me fearful for these kids future. Yes DLA is not means tested and all of us me included would gladly forgo it if it meant that our DC didn’t have their disability. Shame on all of you who begrudge a few quid to disabled kids.

@karmakameleon don't be a dick . Having a disabled child costs a lot ! 🙄

Where did I say it didn’t cost a lot? I have one. I know exactly how much it costs and I know it’s not cheap.

There are posters on this thread which obviously do not know how very expensive it is to have a child or adult who is disabled and needs help more than others.

An autistic child does not have the capacity for knowing/remembering, where they are 'at' at any time. You can 'train' - for want of a better word - a child to do simple things, but that takes patience and time, and involves paying someone to help the parents do just that.

I wish people would understand more about what 'care' means, whether in a residential situation or domiciliary care. One of the most important parts of care is being able to communicate, discuss things, according to the age and understanding of the client, of any age, from 0 to 90. Many, many people think that domiciliary care involves just physical help. It does not. Communication is paramount, yet that isn't even given in residential situations for all ages.

Autism is relatively new. That is because it was not recognised as being a disease. There are many disabilities like that. If autism was taken seriously, why is there such a high number on the waiting lists, and how is it t hat drug manufacturers cannot supply the drugs? Most of the answer is that the NHS is reluctant to make a diagnosis which will cost the country money. I think that is true even now, in the 21st century.

There are people who think that only the physically disabled need helpers. That is not true, and no matter that there is more understanding, wheelchair users are still what comes to mind when 'disability' comes up. I would be a very wealthy woman if I had a fiver for everyone who sees me on my feet, or walking and cannot understand why I need a wheelchair. The attitude is still prevalent among many people.

Take education, for example as where PIP/DLA is so necessary to the disabled child, whatever the disability. The school leaving age is 16. Students leave then regardless of how slow they are, even in cases of mental incapacity. If they could advance in their learning in an extra year just as students are studying for their A levels, their education stands a good chance of catching up, but there are few senior classes for them to stay on.

If DLA/PIP buys an extra year at school, then parents have no right NOT to claim for the child, even if they are 'comfortably off' because it is a child's right to education, even if they will not pass exams, and the child's RIGHT to enjoy a life made possible with extra help. Parents have a DUTY OF CARE (there is now an Act of Parliament) to make sure their children have every opportunity to education and welfare. Parents MUST NOT write off the child's rights by thinking they have enough money not to apply for non means tested benefits.

Your comment predisposes that I am ignorant of benefits and of the benefit I have been claiming for decades: DLA. I know it is now called PIP. Did I say I didn't know?

Of course they are different. There are no new claimants to DLA for any age, but whatever they call it when you get it, you travel through life with, and if you are not getting the full amount, you can claim more when you need it, but there is a limit. The limit is not enough. Limits never are.

If a child under 16 already has the non means tested benefit, it is rolled over, but whether it is regarded as a new claim or not, I do not know now, and it is easily obtainable on google if I need to know, and yes, adults receiving DLA/PIP do not have to apply for AA. It is all there on google.

The OP wants to apply for the benefit which is now called PIP. Did someone tell her she should not claim taxpayer's money when they have a high income? I suspect someone did, someone with a similar attitude to some posters on this thread.

The fact is that regardless of how much money comes into the family coffers, if they do not claim it on behalf of a child who needs it, that child is entitled to appeal against the parents on the grounds that he/she is entitled to the money and that the parents must claim it on behalf of the child because THE MONEY IS THE CHILD'S and they DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT not to take awau their child's opportunity to live as their peers without disability. That takes money: and the state helps with that, and it is the CHILD's RIGHT to receive it whether the parents want it or not. All those who say that the parents have no right to it if they are wealthy do not appear to know that.

Whether the state recognises the fact or not, it is my belief that if there is child abuse if children do not receive the benefits they are entitled to just because the parents don't want to.

It is no different to the cases where parents refuse to send their child to special education schools, because of publicity. That is child abuse too. There are parents begging local authorities to place their children according to need, yet there are other parents who cannot face their child's need for special education. I once heard a person in an authoritative position, with a Downs Syndrome child get up and say ''Spending money on these children is just chucking it down the drain because they cannot be educated to work as adults'', to which I replied ''Maybe so, but if staying on at school enables them to learn how to take care of themselves, then that is money more than well spent.''.

I am afraid that attitude still prevails in some places.

The OP wants to apply for the benefit which is now called PIP.

No, she doesn’t. PIP is not for children. It is DLA for under 16s.

If a child under 16 already has the non means tested benefit, it is rolled over

It doesn’t roll over. When a child turns 16 they or their appointee has to apply for PIP. If they apply on time, DLA will continue until a decision is made, but it absolutely does not ‘roll over’.

whatever they call it when you get it, you travel through life with,

No. Most working age adults who used to be on DLA have been transferred over to PIP.

It is no different to the cases where parents refuse to send their child to special education schools, because of publicity. That is child abuse too.

Legally, there is a parental right to a mainstream education unless the LA can prove a mainstream placement would be incompatible with the efficient education of others, and* *there are no reasonable steps the LA could take to prevent this. This is set out in law and is a much higher threshold than many LAs, schools and the general public think. The complexity of the child’s SEN or perception mainstream education is unsuitable are not lawful reasons to refuse a mainstream education in England.

The school leaving age is 16. Students leave then regardless of how slow they are, even in cases of mental incapacity.

Any 16 year old who lacked mental capacity should have an EHCP which can fund education until 25, or 26 in some cases. Parents don’t need to pay for another year of education.

I understand completely what you have had to go through, and how proud you must be now.

You will always find people taking advantage of our vulnerability to make themself feel more powerful. They do not abuse able people - they might hit back.

I think all disabled people suffer from disability discrimination. I think those who are mentally challenged get a very much more raw deal, because many of them are unable to find words to protect themselves, and they must not try to protect themselves from physical abuse, having a disability, no one will believe you.

I now fear the phrase: ''No one will believe you'', because it is so true.

I was disabled suddenly, and people didn't understand why I could walk one day and not the next. I gradually recovered some use of my legs. I have been deliberately knocked over by people confident that I would be able to balance myself. I have also had people who think they have the right to take control of my wheelchair and to lay hands on a wheelchair is the same as physical assault. Hospital workers also offend in that way.

I’m sorry if I upset you but the fact is that what you posted was wrong. You said that those claiming pension credit could get PIP/DLA and this is not correct. Pension credit is for those over retirement age and unless there is a claim established before pensionable age is reached, the only benefit that can be claimed is attendance allowance. I was a disability benefits advisor for a disabled charity for over twenty years so you don’t need to lecture me on the ins and outs of this subject. I’m on your side.

Students can leave school at 16 and indeed many schools don't have sixth forms and If they do not all pupils take Alevels

And can go onto to college to do other courses
However in many special schools go up to 19 year,,of age ,and even after 19 there are special colleges for some pupils with EHCP,s