inside info re DLA decision process

[jjones]

As some you know I had my tribunal on friday. There was a man from the DLA there who gave us some inside info on how the decisions are made now. In June this year, they brought out a new decision makers guide to make it much more clear cut for the decisions to be made on the severe mental impairment reasoning for hrm, it is on page 58 of the link. I hope it is of some help to others.

An interesting read! Thanks for the link. :)

I thought it was a lot easier to see what they are looking for not only them but for us parents aswell.

Thank you so much. This is really useful.

I don't think the guidance has changed, really. Certainly when I looked 2 years ago, the cumulative criteria was the same.

What I do think they have done, is expand the advice to show different ways people can meet the same criteria.

I think it is really so important for people to realise that their child has to meet each and every point, rather than thinking that, say, as long as they can show the majority of the criteria are met, they will let you off the rest.

Thank you so much. I have Carer's coming round to help with my renewal so this is really additional helpful information.

R(DLA)/100 deals specifically with this issue, justabout.

The legislation very clearly states "...impairment of intelligence and social functioning" NOT "...impairment of intelligence or social functioning".

Now, what that means is that you have to be able to demonstrate that your child is impaired in both areas.

So, a child who is of very low intelligence, but is otherwise unimpaired, would not meet the test.

A child who is of normal intelligence in all other areas but has absolutely no social functioning would not meet the test.

HOWEVER a child who has above average 'notional intelligence', ie. they score highly on IQ tests, but has, for example, absolutely no sense of danger at the age of 9 years old (as was the case in R(DLA)/100) can be argued to have a "severe impairment of intelligence" on the basis of useful intelligence, ie. the intelligence which is needed to live life.

I think that the guidance does give creedence to this in DMG 61367, which states that the DM should look at other factors which indicate severe impairment of intelligence despite an IQ over 55, one of which "is a lack of understanding of everyday living." No sense of danger would be argued. Also, DMG 61370 "The
term "social functioning" is what that person is able to do with the intelligence they have."

So I think the DMG does have it covered, and it issn't incompatible with NAS.

Very interesting all the information on this thread, thanks all. Sadly I've already sent my application away but it come come in really handy for the appeal / tribunal!

'Tis all theory for me, to Milady - I sent my renewal forms, including RDLA/100, but I haven't heard yet. It is the first time I have really gone for HRM. Last time we had no dx, so I didn't feel that she DEFINITELY qualified. This time, I think she definitely does. I mean, yesterday, we took her shopping and she spent the entire 2 hours in meltdown. if I hadn't had her Mac Major we would have been in real trouble.

Sorry to hear that, justabout. I think the younger they are, the harder it is to prove the SMI grounds, but if he qualifies, he qualifies.

According to those guidelines DS qualifies for high rate mobility but he's on lower rate has been since 5 never thought he'd actually get it this time with all the talk of changes so i'm quite happy with the outcome.

I'm sorry too justabout. But good to hear that they didn't downgrade the HRC.

Lougle it's the "useful intelligence" I find hard to get my head around. DS is 3.3, can count to twelve, recognise numerals 0-10 (okay not a genius but he's capable of learning some things) but if he needed to apply that knowledge to problem-solving in real life or was asked to do either of those things he just wouldn't / couldn't. It's the same with anything he has learnt, it's all in isolation.

That's another thing isn't it? Behaviour beyond the child's control. It really is in a lot of cases but people are being turned down as they're not being believed. The whole thing about meltdowns when out and about it that the child is beyond reason, distraction, coaxing, being cross etc

I've just had to fork out for a big pushchair too since he's dragging his legs and refusing to let me take him anywhere. I've had more than a few looks as I've been going from one end of the town centre to another with him tipped back on two wheels.

Ah well, case law is on our side it seems.

Useful intelligence. Well, to live life, you have to survive life, don't you? If your behaviour is such that without intervention you would die or be seriously injured, ie. walking straight out into the road without looking, trying to 'jump' off of a high surface when your body is physically incapable of jumping (just using a couple of things my DD1 does), then being able to count, or write or draw etc., becomes kind of irrelevant, doesn't it?

That is the distinction that has to be made. So faesibly, a child who can achieve level 4s across the board in year 1 can still have a severe impairment of intelligence, because their intelligence is of no use to them in everyday living.

That makes a lot of sense Lougle, thank you.