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?

It is not impossible for some parents to take courses leading to better qualifications while the children are at school. It is impossible for some.

There’s a not insignificant number of disabled children not in school.

If people on benefits have to surrender that benefit if they are in hospital for 4 weeks or more, does that not mean they are paying for their treatment?

People who are not receiving benefit do not pay for their treatment. Those receiving benefit have to give it back to the Government, because the law says they cannot receive benefit and have hospital in patient treatment at the same time.

I believe that equates to their having to pay toward their treatment, because they still have to pay for their commitments. It is only morally wrong?

Put it in her savings account and use it for legal representation to get the EHCP details met or access extra support at uni or where ever

No, it absolutely does not mean that they are paying for their treatment. This has been explained to you several times. You’re talking nonsense. It’s only disability benefits which are affected as well as some add ins, but largely other income replacement benefits are not affected by hospital stays - neither is state pension. It’s the care component of disability benefits which is the issue here. The care component of AA, DLA and PIP contributes towards the cost of your care.

When you go into hospital the state is effectively funding your care as part of your stay - the medical staff are taking care of your needs. If they continued to pay care benefits they would effectively be paying for your care twice. You get a concession of 28 days and then benefit stops if you are in hospital beyond that, or have consecutive stays within a certain time frame. Mobility allowance is also affected after 28 days because you are in hospital so don’t need it but if you have a motability vehicle paid for by your allowance you can get a three month extension.

Do your really think that an allowance paid at the maximum of £108 per week for AA and £184 per week for PIP and DLA even begins to cover what it costs to treat and care for you in hospital ? Seriously ? Have a look at care home fees. They can top £1000 a week and that’s just for care, not hospital treatment. Can we stop with this nonsense now.

No, it means that someone in hospital is having their care needs met, so don't get money to have it provided outside of hospital at the same time.

While you continue to post incorrect information publicly, people will correct you publicly. You have an outdated and incorrect view of the benefits system and have posted about benefits which were phased out years ago as though they still exist, and have cited the national assistance act which was phased out years and years ago and superseded by numerous rounds of welfare reform. People visit these forums to get information about benefits. As a former disability benefit adviser I would be failing disabled people if I didn’t point out your errors to avoid people reading your posts thinking they are not entitled to claim, when in fact they are.

I’ve worn myself out answering this poster, as have several others, and she’s clearly either not reading or not understanding the replies because she’s asking the same questions over and over again, despite comprehensive answers. I’ve given up now, beyond correcting completely wrong information. As has been pointed out by other posters, many people visit these thread for information on benefits and would be put off by this posters assertions if they remained uncorrected.

The top rates of disability benefits wouldn’t even begin to cover the cost of a week in a care home, let alone the cost of hospital treatment on top of personal care. It’s utter nonsense.

I don't agree with you, and I said some benefits.

. ''This has been explained to you several times. You’re talking nonsense.''

While I have the opportunity: why are you so nasty? You can give out information without being rude. You know nothing about me. Just because I am not so knowledgeable about benefits as you assure everyone you are an expert, doesn't mean I know nothing about anything. I have not studied the benefit system, so don't milk it for all it's worth like you obviously have, as you say you are severely disabled.

I am a taxpayer, so why would I know about means tested benefits? If you are able to tell me that people on benefits pay tax, then that is another thing I don't know about. If taxpayers can still claim income related benefits, tell us, let everyone know.

know nothing about anything. I have not studied the benefit system, so don't milk it for all it's worth like you obviously have, as you say you are severely disabled.

Now who’s nasty ? If you’d actually read my posts l’ve said several times l worked as an outreach worker for the disabled, which is why l have a knowledge of a range of benefits.

in all your posts you’ve been defending the right of disabled people to claim the benefits they’re entitled to, but now you’re accusing me of ‘milking the system’ because l’ve disclosed that l’m severely disabled. Assuming l’m claiming the disability benefits to which, as you’ve said numerous times here, disabled people are perfectly entitled, how is that milking the system ?

I’m simply trying to explain to you why the benefits system is the way it is, and other posters have also replied to you in the same way. You’re either not reading the replies or you’re not understanding what’s being said because you keep repeating the same things and asking the same questions, and in the process posting incorrect information. My concern is that MN is a source of information and many people come to these types of threads looking for benefit advice, so when you post it needs to be factual and accurate.

In answer to you question, yes many benefit claimants are tax payers. Many claimants work and claim income related benefits which are taxable. Many other income replacement benefits are taxable such as ESA (a sickness benefit) and state pension, to name a couple. Disability benefits are not taxable but they can be claimed while working because they are paid to cover the extra cost of disability.

I apologise if you think l’ve been rude to you, but it’s really frustrating trying to explain how the present disability benefit system works , to someone who clearly doesn’t want to hear it. We all have our own ideas of how things should be, but unfortunately that’s not the reality. So in the interests of not derailing the OP’s thread any longer, l’ll bow out of the discussion now and leave you to it.

Its already not in favour of neurodivergent people. My autistic son's PIP assessor had no knowledge of autism and made assumptions of what he could do. It felt like it was a deliberate attempt to get his points down so he could get less financial support. My son decided not to appeal because he couldn't cope with it and I agreed with him; I think the appeal system would have wrecked his mental health.

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.

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.

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.

This. 100%

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.

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!

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 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.

Well you are privileged then. Count your "blessings "

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?

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 ?

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 ?

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.

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.

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.