High rate mobility DLA for autism

[henryhsmum]

I have just received my son's DLA renewal through in a record time of 3 weeks! He has autism and ADHD. Fortunate in that he had stayed on his current award of high rate care, low rate mobility . I am trying to get high rate mobility for him as his mobility needs have got a lot worse since his last claim. DWP are trying to argue it on the basis that he does not have severe impairment of intelligence on basis he is 2 years behind his peers but that is not deemed severe enough. I have read that they should not just be looking at IQ/chronological age measures of intelligence but also at functional intelligence and that is where my DS has the severe impairment. For example , he completely fails to recognise danger and without failure will try and run straight into a road. If I ask him to look for cars he shakes his head and sometimes will say no while trying to bolt into the road! So I am going to go for a reconsideration/appeal and want to cite the relevant case law in terms of demonstrating severe impairment of intelligence in situations such as my son's. Can anyone help?

I can't help with case law but a friend managed to get HRM for her ds who has PDA and ADHD. She applied when he was 6 and had already been knocked over once by a car (not seriously hurt).

'Severe impairment of intelligence’
is generally taken to be an IQ of 55
or less. However, this is not the only
measure of impaired intelligence. Some
children, such as those with disorders
in the autism spectrum, may do well in
intelligence tests but cannot apply that
intelligence in a useful way in the real
world.
So, if a child’s IQ is above 55, or has not
had an IQ test, the decision-maker at the
Department of Work and Pensions must
consider other evidence, including that of
impairment of social functioning where
that has an effect on useful intelligence.

DLA case law has accepted that autism
spectrum disorders are physical disorders
of brain development.
You need to be able to show that:
• any behavioural problems, which may
sometimes include a failure to exercise
their powers of walking, stem from a
physical disability, and,
• their walking difficulties, including
interruptions in their ability to make
progress on foot, happen often enough
so that their walking ability is so limited
that they are virtually unable to walk.
For example, children with autism
spectrum disorders
For example, children with autism
spectrum disorders often have ‘refusal
episodes’, where they refuse to either
leave the house or go where parents
want them to or will, whilst out, refuse
to go any further. These refusals are not
down to naughtiness or wilfulness, and
cannot be overcome by any threat of
punishment or promise of reward. They
occur because of the extreme rigidity of
thinking associated with autism and the
inability to deal with unexpected events.
These refusal episodes can be seen as
a ‘temporary paralysis of will’ which will
count towards a ‘virtual inability to walk’.
If it

www.cafamily.org.uk/media/379407/dla_learningdisabilitiesandautismspectrum.pdf

Here explains it

I copied and pasted the wrong bit, the link explains it!

It's not as simple as Severe Mental Impairment. It's a quadruple test. It's a test of all of the following criteria (if one fails, the whole claim fails):

Severe Mental Impairment
and
Severe Impairment of Social Functioning
and
Severe Behavioural Problems
and
In receipt of High Rate Care.

SMI: ADHD is specifically excluded in the Decision Makers' Guide:

"61359 It is not possible with the current state of medical knowledge to attribute the condition attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (commonly known as ADHD) to a state of arrested development or incomplete physical development of the brain within the meaning of the regulation.
1 SS (DLA) Regs, reg 12(5)

61360 In cases involving attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, the DM should make sure that the person has no other disability which could satisfy the severely mentally impaired test. Difficult cases should be referred to Medical Services for advice." pg. 57

The SMI bar is set high. In IQ terms it would be an IQ of 55 or less. IQ is not necessarily the determination, though:

"The DM should consider whether there

1. is difficulty with communication so that

1.1 speech may be severely impaired, often only monosyllabic or grunting noises or 1.2 reading or writing skills may be absent or very poor or

1. are severe learning difficulties or
2. is a lack of understanding of everyday living.

People with severe impairment of intelligence are likely to need specialized schooling, and supervision of all activities. In cases of doubt and where the IQ is over 55 the DM should refer the case to Medical Services for expert advice." Pg. 58

Severe Impairment of Social Function is set similarly high:

"some people who have a low intelligence can relate to other
people and perform basic social skills once they are shown how to do them. But others who have a low intelligence are not able to perform basic tasks or relate to others. It is the latter who would display severe impairment of intelligence and social functioning." p.59

Severe Behavioural Problems is set extremely high:

"61376 People are treated as having severe behavioural problems if they exhibit disruptive behaviour that

1. is extreme and
2. regularly requires another person to intervene and physically restrain them

2.1 to prevent them injuring themselves or others or 2.2 damaging property and

1. is so unpredictable that they require another person to be present watching over them whenever they are awake.

It is essential that all three conditions are satisfied. The disruptive behaviour does not need to be displayed at all times but it must be extreme. The word “extreme” is an ordinary English word which here refers to behaviour which is wholly out of the ordinary." p. 59

"61379 The claimant’s behaviour must be so destructive and unpredictable that they require the presence of another person to watch over them whenever they are awake. This is in all aspects of the claimant’s life both indoors and out. If a claimant displays
behavioural problems at home but elsewhere, for example at school, is well behaved then the test will not be satisfied." p. 61

It's a very, very hard test, and no sense of danger is not sufficient to pass it.

I certainly know many families where their child with ASD receives high rate mobility without any physical disability

zzz you can get a badge without being in receipt of higher rate

DD1 had one when she was on HRC with no mobility. I had to appeal after applying and being rejected. It was on the basis of her walking and her brain being physically impaired.

My friend has one, due to her sons incontinence issues, she doesn't get HRC

Sorry I meant HRM

I think my friend applied on the grounds 'Have a condition where they need quick access to a motor vehicle, so that they can be treated in the vehicle, or taken quickly somewhere they can be treated' (incontinence)

Thank you all very helpful. He does have a diagnosis of autism as well as ADHD so I know he passes the arrested development of the brain test as there is case law that children automatically pass it if they are diagnosed autistic. He hasn't been IQ scored but I do have educational psychology tests to show his comprehension is significantly delayed. The danger is just one example of how he is impaired but I guess it is the most relevant in the context of mobility. I will try and get a blue badge regardless as he is so dangerous when he is out. I am frightened to take him anywhere on my own as I know that his behaviour starts very quickly and he is now too strong for me to control him.

What is the best way to get a blue badge if you do not have HRM? I have various testimonials from CAMHS, his childminder all stating how much restraint he needs and how dangerous and unpredictable he is when out. Is that enough to get a blue badge without HRM?

As far as I can see, it's even harder to get a blue badge with ASD, now, than it is to get HRM. The criteria are really strict and don't account for the arrested development/mental impairment clauses that DLA has.

We get it for DD but she goes to school for children with SLDs and crucially I think, she had paed statement saying she needs 1:1 supervision 24 hours a day.

agree with ouryve - probably harder to get a blue badge with autism than getting HRC. in my LA it is these days virtually impossible to get a BB for Asd without HRM.

our local Blue Badge team even suggested I look into getting HRM as they won't be able to issue a BB for Dd otherwise... it'crazy.

It is getting harder. The new PIP criteria will mean that more people with developmental conditions will get the enhanced rate of PIP for mobility, but the BB criteria for automatic qualification us not 'enhanced rate of PIP' (ie. hrm) but 'scores 8 points or more in the 'getting around' section of the mobility element' - So it won't be enough to 'merely' get enhanced mobility, it will have to be enhanced on the basis of barely being able to walk, physically.

I get it for DD 14 but it took 8 months and tribunal papers being registered to get it.

She qualified on virtually unable to walk due to temporary paralysis (her refusals to walk).

She does have hypermobility in her knees, ankles, tight calf muscles and low core tone but it was deemed that its her autism which causes the refusals as in a person without autism the physical difficulties would cause nothing more than discomfort.

My friends son got a blue badge when in receipt of low rate mobility.
He has a dx of aspergers attends a mainstream school with no one to one support and he's not statemented. Just took a letter from their gp!
My own ds attends a special school,needs constant 1-1 when awake, has severe autism and severe learning difficulties and we even have the same bloody gp!
But the council rejected our application ( same bloody council too)

It's very frustrating how there is such inconsistency. Our LA have been good in terms of support so far but will see how they are with a blue badge . I am going to appeal the DLA with help of a consultant so will see where I get with that first. I think his case must have been pretty clear cut otherwise as they determined it within 3 weeks. I would have been very surprised to get HRM straight away tbh, knew there would be a fight for it