No longer getting DLA

[Einstein]

My son was diagnosed with Asperger's when he was 4 1/2 and I have been receiving DLA and carer's allowance. I had to reapply way back in February this year as his payments were due to stop on 20/7/09 (today!!). He turned 10 on 18th July.

 

However, the DWP wrote to my sons school and they said that he is brilliant and doing really well and the DWP based my whole application on what the school have said! I'm so frustrated!

 

I am appealing against their decision because my sons needs haven't changed! They haven't taken into account all the difficulties he has to deal with in everday life in the wider community not just at school which is a controlled, structured environment . My son's needs haven't changed they are the same now as they were in January.

 

Whenever I speak to anyone at the DWP I just get put through to some idiot in a call centre with no Asperger's knowledge and just reads whats on the screen! AAAARRRRGGGHHH

 

 

Can anyone help or has anyone else been through a similar experience? I even got intouch with the Doctor who originally diagnosed my son. She sympathised with my situation but only deals with new diagnosis so wasn't much help. I am going to see my GP this afternoon and will ask him if he could write a medical report for me as I need someone professional to support my claim.

 

 

 

[Sally44]

I would go into school and talk to them about it.

SEN schools sometimes talk so positive about the children that they forget to mention they are SEN or bear in mind who they are writing the reference for.

I know of another family who had exactly the same problem recently. They went into school and told the SENCO that if their child was 'doing so brilliantly' then they were going to move him mainstream as he obviously did not need the SEN placement he had according to them. The father also said that when his son had been moved and deteriorated and regressed that he would then sue the school. The family appealed against the DLA decison and the school re-wrote their appraisal.

It is all very frustrating, but I would talk to the school, and also include any other supporting documentation you have ie. reports/Statement etc.

[call me jaded]

My son's school said my boy 'enjoyed playing football' on the DLA form. He's never kicked a ball in his life, but does enjoy standing on the pitch whilst everyone else runs up and down. I had to contact the school and explain what their positivity had done and they were extremely apologetic. I then asked the DWP for a reconsideration of the claim. They contacted the school and all was resolved and we got our decision awarded indefinitely.

 

[Einstein]

Thanks for the reply. The trouble is my son has never been statemented and goes to main stream school. He is very bright and academic which makes it really hard to convince the DWP that he is in fact special needs. His problem are much more apparent outside the home or at home.

 

I contacted the NAS and spoke to a lovely man who suggests that I appeal against the decision and even take it to a tribunal. He also said that schools report often make the mistake of explaining to the DWP all the things that a child CAN DO as opposed to WHAT THEY CAN'T DO because that is how they praise pupils naturally.

 

I have cut and pasted the email reply from the NAS and hopefully it will help others with a similar problem or situation:

 

Further to our conversation of this morning, the issue of unsupportive school enquiry reports is one that I receive very frequent enquiries about. The basic problem is that DLA is a benefit that concentrates exclusively on negative aspects of behaviour and functioning, and why it is a very distressing form to complete, so when a decision maker receives some information that accentuates the positive it is often used as a justification for reducing or refusing the benefit. This is not always the school's fault either, sometimes they just get completely the wrong end of the stick and will emphasise what a child can do, as opposed to what their difficulties at school are, simply because they are understandably used to praising their pupils achievements etc.

 

When making a reconsideration or at appeal stage, here are some points you may wish to consider in relation to the school report:

 

Obtain a copy of the school enquiry form from the DWP or the school itself if they have a copy and go through it carefully, commenting on anything you disagree with and expanding on areas where they have mentioned concerns. Ideally, it is best if a staff member who knows the child well can back this up with a more narrative explanation of what a child's difficulties are at the school (the school enquiry form is very brief)

 

Mention if there would be a more suitable person at the school to complete the form if it was done by someone without a detailed knowledge of your son and/or ASD's.

 

Mention that a very common characteristic of children on the autism spectrum is that they may behave markedly differently in the very structured environment of a school in comparison to their home lives. DLA decision makers are civil servants, not medically trained so they may well not be aware of this as they do not specialise in assessing claims for specific conditions/ages.

 

That a school day is not a full day and that the care component should be judged on a child's attention and supervisory needs over a full 24 hour period. The lower and middle rates look at the need for attention and/or supervision for an hour a day and on frequent occasions through the day respectively. It is entirely possible these needs can be demonstrated either side of the school day in the morning and evening. Also, schools cannot possibly comment on a child's night time needs which leads to possible entitlement to the high rate of the care component unless a child is in a residential setting.

 

Following on from this, that in relation to the low rate of the mobility component this looks at the need for "guidance and supervision on unfamiliar routes" and again, schools will rarely, if ever see children outside of the school gates. So, it is wrong to base a decision on this particular component based on this, and parents evidence should be the one that is taken into account.

 

There is a piece of case law (decisions from higher level appeal bodies which can set precedents) which mentions the difficulties with judging care and mobility needs based on school evidence. Though very long, and not in relation to a child with autism the key paragraphs are as follows:

 

"The school report in this case was similar to school reports obtained in connection with disability living allowance claims in other cases such as this, in that it failed to identify any specific supervision needs. Such reports are sometimes used by decision makers as a basis for rejecting the evidence of other professionals concerned with the care of a child, and in this case actually led the tribunal to say that they rejected the evidence of a consultant community paediatrician who was treating the claimant (wrongly described by the tribunal as the claimant’s general practitioner).

 

Although a school report will very frequently contain valuable evidence in a claim for disability living allowance by a school-age claimant, it is necessary to have particular regard to the nature of the school environment when evaluating such evidence in relation to the evidence of other witnesses. Young children at school have to be more or less continually supervised for the school to function properly, so that a child with a disability may not need supervision over and above that which is normally given to all other children while attending school. However, children with disabilities may need supervision beyond that needed by other children when outside the school environment in order to avoid substantial danger to themselves or others, and it is that supervision which needs to be considered when deciding entitlement to care component. Evidence from a school should therefore be considered along with all the other evidence concerning a child’s care needs in deciding whether the claimant can safely be left unsupervised and whether the child requires substantially more care from another person than children of their age would normally require".

 

The reference number for this case is CDLA 3779 2004 (you can see this in fill by visiting the Commissioners website, http://www.osscsc.gov.uk/aspx/default.aspx).

 

This is a very commonly quoted piece of legislation when disputing DLA decisions and because of that, I am unsure how effective it is. Case Law is sometimes bought up at tribunal stage . If writing to the DWP at reconsideration you may wish to mention something along the lines of

 

"Having taken Welfare Rights advice I understand that the Social Security Commissioners have in the past questioned the validity of school enquiry reports in assessing DLA entitlement and that this information should be taken in conjunction with all other available supporting evidence and not solely relied on or taken out of context".

 

Though, this is of course, entirely up to you to decide. I do, of course, wish you the best of luck and do feel free to contact me either by phone or email if you require further information regarding this matter.

 

If the case does go to tribunal, the following is a very good guide as to the procedure:

 

http://www.advicenow.org.uk/advicenow-guid...getting-enough/

 

 

[Kathryn]

Thanks for sharing the NAS reply Einstein. It's really detailed and I'm sure it will help others as well.

 

K x

 

 

[bid]

Many years ago we lost my son's DLA when his new SW decided he should be on the higher rate of the care element, and told me not to worry, he would sort it all out...ended up with a report from the school and loss of DLA as a direct result, despite the fact that since his previous DLA award he had an additional dx of AS, plus was now on controlled meds.

 

I went ballistic! I asked every professional involved to write in support of his DLA, including the school, who tried to weasel out of it by saying they didn't really understand what it was all about and only answered the questions they were asked...I pointed out that maybe they should have contacted me if they didn't really know what it was all about, especially over all the question they answered as N/A or 'don't know'. Of course I lost my CA too, which financially we absolutely relied on as I couldn't work as I was DS' primary carer: I made such a row that SS ended up giving us a loan to tide us over until their mess was sorted out.

 

Anyway, his DLA was reinstated, at the higher rate. But I was soooo furious, because it was the school doctor who suggested we apply for DLA in the first place, never had any trouble claiming it before, with no questionnaire sent to the school. Grrr!

 

And to add insult to injury, when we wrote and said we wanted a different SW, SS wrote back and said it was OK, the SW still felt happy to work with us!!

 

Never again: I always completed renewals myself after that with his consultant commenting and signing it. Twelve years later it still makes my blood boil!

 

*breathe* *breathe*

 

Bid

Edited July 27, 2009 by bid

[lynne]

 

 

The moral of the story is do not put your childs school down for a contact for DLA. I always use a friend who knows what my son is like.

 

 

If you do use the school you need to speak to them before hand and say what you have said to the DLA.

 

The questions the DLA ask are very open so the school can either give a very short answer or a long answer.

[Kathryn]

And to add insult to injury, when we wrote and said we wanted a different SW, SS wrote back and said it was OK, the SW still felt happy to work with us!!

 

 

Over the years I've read loads of comments on this forum from people applying for DLA and it seems that for mny people school evidence has scuppered their chances of getting DLA. It probably would have done the same for my daughter, luckily for us, they accepted our medical evidence, sent their own doctor to assess her and didn't involve the school.

 

I think this observation from the response quoted by Einstein is quite important. Schools are contained environments and provide a high level of supervision anyway. They cannot be expected to evaluate a child's care needs outside this setting.

 

Although a school report will very frequently contain valuable evidence in a claim for disability living allowance by a school-age claimant, it is necessary to have particular regard to the nature of the school environment when evaluating such evidence in relation to the evidence of other witnesses. Young children at school have to be more or less continually supervised for the school to function properly, so that a child with a disability may not need supervision over and above that which is normally given to all other children while attending school. However, children with disabilities may need supervision beyond that needed by other children when outside the school environment in order to avoid substantial danger to themselves or others, and it is that supervision which needs to be considered when deciding entitlement to care component. Evidence from a school should therefore be considered along with all the other evidence concerning a child’s care needs in deciding whether the claimant can safely be left unsupervised and whether the child requires substantially more care from another person than children of their age would normally require".

[MOSEY]

Oh dear - its such a nightmare applying for DLA! I was totally stressed doing the form and felt so guilty about the negative focus on my boy.

 

I am waiting to hear whether he qualifies again and have read your post with interest!