Not going to go down the route of exploring those who may be lying to get PIP and focus on what I know from experience. [SORRY just realised this is a long reply.]
Not sure what the solution is, tbh. My DD gets PIP, but she is very disabled by her AuDHD because it co presents with ARFIDs, social anxiety/agoraphobia, self-harming and suicidal ideation. Our intention in claiming was to empower her to make decisions about treatment and medication options that we are forced to obtain privately (waited 5 year on CAMHS list before giving up and getting her assessed privately, only to find not ASC/ADHD support/therapy/assistance would be forthcoming via the NHS/SocServs anyway). We also intended this to be about scaffolding her into independence - an access course, degree and hopefully a job one day - so it was NOT about seeking a lifetime financial benefit. However, I think she may remain on it longer term if it evolves that FT work may be an issue with the current move away from hybrid work practices and flexible hours. We calculated that this year, with DBT group therapy, 121, private prescription charges we will have spent £12000. The £5,500 DD receives has helped, but also meant that she feels less guilty about being a burden, about feeling broken and as though this is all her fault (rather than a failure of the NHS to help her earlier), and that she has actively engaged in therapy because HER money has paid for it, directly. And we ARE seeing a slow, positive change in her. Finally.
So why am I chuntering on? Because I DO think that there may be issues with the way it is assessed and allocated - and the ethos underlying it. Technically I and my DS could also apply for PIP. We are both AuDHD and have individual needs that - were it not for the fact that I was lucky enough to marry a now successful [wealthy] man, to have benefited from the property boom, to have managed to find work easily/change jobs in the course of a week when I quit on a whim or couldn't cope throughout my 20s - I too could have needed PIP to cushion me and my DS through those periods. But I haven’t entirely because a) we have means to buy in the support we needed: we accessed private assessments, private therapy, private medication; we could afford for me not to work, to be the SAHP/carer for my DD from the age of 7; the list goes on. And b) because my periods of dysfunction have not lead to a negative financial impact on the family.
So, in part, I think it needs to change to consider whether there is a significantly negative financial impact flowing from the disability (not just new costs) and whether the household actually needs the additional funds to cushion it - and I think this was the initial intention that the severely mentally and physically disabled who needed 24hr support, specialist equipment/transport and incurred higher utility bills running equipment could have help.
And yes, I do believe there are some people with ‘short-term’ disabilities: illnesses that disable them in the short to medium term where PIP support is warranted for 6m periods, in tandem with therapy and a multi-agency [LOL fantasy] ‘back to work’ programmes supported by SS, GPs, OT and the employers, ie for claimants who are currently receiving PIP for 3-5 years without review. This needs to stop. 16yo’s being awarded PIP and getting arsy because mum isn’t giving them enough of their PIP in pocket money (another thread); families using it on general household running costs that would be no different if that child were NT - this is a farce. The basic test should be - what is the COST of this person’s disability. In my DD’s case, the increased cost of her disability is £12k this year, it probably does run at £5k a year so the PIP directly addresses additional needs and costs. My DS has, to date, only needed assessments and medication. Still expensive, but he will transition to a shared care agreement with GP and costs will be absorbed by the NHS that was. He has also needed a new laptop and hideously expensive software (and training), a personal printer/paper/ink in order to support uni. We didn’t need PIP for this as it came via the DSA at Student Finance England. So the ‘cost’ to us of his disability will have been either negligent or offset by direct provision of equipment and absorbed into the DSA budget.
So, rather than PIP, in some cases, I DO think that there is a case for provision of funded services, for utility bills to be paid by direct grant rather than the money going to the claimant; for a balance to be paid monthly into a Tesco/Aldi online account that can only used towards food/household items and delivered to the recipients home address - or receipts can be submitted to reclaim shopping expenses/utility bills just as people reclaim expenses at work.
I know such an overhaul will be expensive and it may feel very ‘nanny state’, dehumanising even, but the current system isn’t working and is unsustainable long term. We need cross party cooperation and brainstorming to really hammer out some workable solutions.