- Posts: 122
× Members
ESA Regulation 29 2(a)
- Porridge
- Topic Author
- Offline
Less More
10 years 3 months ago - 10 years 3 months ago #116280 by Porridge
“There isn’t anyone who doesn’t appreciate kindness and compassion.” – Dalai Lama
ESA Regulation 29 2(a) was created by Porridge
Does there exist in case law or elsewhere a definition of "life threatening"? Thanks.
“There isn’t anyone who doesn’t appreciate kindness and compassion.” – Dalai Lama
Last edit: 10 years 3 months ago by Gordon.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Gordon
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 51076
10 years 3 months ago #116285 by Gordon
I am not aware of any Case Law in this area, bit that does not mean that there is none, it would help if you could explain more about what you are looking for.
Life Threatening means that there has to be a reasonable expectation of death, there is no definition of what would be reasonable would be, in percentage terms it is probably less than 50% but how much less will likely depend on the disease and the person suffering from it.
It is not enough to show that the claimant has a life threatening disease, you must also show that;
(i) there is medical evidence that the disease is uncontrollable, or uncontrolled, by a recognised therapeutic procedure; and
(ii) in the case of a disease that is uncontrolled, there is a reasonable cause for it not to be controlled by a recognised therapeutic procedure
Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Replied by Gordon on topic ESA Regulation 29 2(a)
Porridge wrote: Does there exist in case law or elsewhere a definition of "life threatening"? Thanks.
I am not aware of any Case Law in this area, bit that does not mean that there is none, it would help if you could explain more about what you are looking for.
Life Threatening means that there has to be a reasonable expectation of death, there is no definition of what would be reasonable would be, in percentage terms it is probably less than 50% but how much less will likely depend on the disease and the person suffering from it.
It is not enough to show that the claimant has a life threatening disease, you must also show that;
(i) there is medical evidence that the disease is uncontrollable, or uncontrolled, by a recognised therapeutic procedure; and
(ii) in the case of a disease that is uncontrolled, there is a reasonable cause for it not to be controlled by a recognised therapeutic procedure
Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Porridge
- Topic Author
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 122
10 years 3 months ago - 10 years 3 months ago #116293 by Porridge
“There isn’t anyone who doesn’t appreciate kindness and compassion.” – Dalai Lama
Replied by Porridge on topic ESA Regulation 29 2(a)
Thank you for the reply Gordon. I have a disease which is categorised by my hospital consultants as being "severe", the particular disease I have is usually categorised in the general medical community internationally as either being mild, moderate, severe or very severe.
Although over the years I have taken every sort of prescribed medication available for it, both experimental and conventional, the severe disease has not gone into remission for more than ten years. My consultants have now acknowleged that in my case, there is evidence that the disease is uncontrollable by any available medication.
So I think that clears up (i) and (ii) in my particular case. But I do not know whether the DWP would deem it to be "life threatening".
There must be a set of criteria used by ATOS or the DWP to decide whether or not they think an applicant has a "life threatening" disease, condition or disablement for the purposes of this regulation.
Although over the years I have taken every sort of prescribed medication available for it, both experimental and conventional, the severe disease has not gone into remission for more than ten years. My consultants have now acknowleged that in my case, there is evidence that the disease is uncontrollable by any available medication.
So I think that clears up (i) and (ii) in my particular case. But I do not know whether the DWP would deem it to be "life threatening".
There must be a set of criteria used by ATOS or the DWP to decide whether or not they think an applicant has a "life threatening" disease, condition or disablement for the purposes of this regulation.
“There isn’t anyone who doesn’t appreciate kindness and compassion.” – Dalai Lama
Last edit: 10 years 3 months ago by Gordon.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- Gordon
- Offline
Less More
- Posts: 51076
10 years 3 months ago #116298 by Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Replied by Gordon on topic ESA Regulation 29 2(a)
Porridge
An extract from the WCA Handbook on the subject
NFD - Non Functional Descriptor
I have checked the Decision Makers Guide and there is no additional definition. I think you have to argue your point that there is a risk of death from this disease, however, you will most certainly need to provide medical evidence in support of this, so your doctor must be willing to state that;
1. There is a risk of death from this disease
2. That it is uncontrollable by recognised methods
3. That there is good reason why it is not controllable.
Gordon
An extract from the WCA Handbook on the subject
For example when considering hypertension,
A claimant who attends the MEC with no previous history of hypertension and on no treatment where the blood pressure is measured and found to be high would not fulfil criteria for this NFD as there is no evidence that their disease is uncontrollable.
However where a claimant who attends a tertiary referral centre and whose condition, despite intensive intervention, remains severe and uncontrolled and is life-threatening, would be considered as satisfying the criteria for this NFD to be applied.
Another example of where this NFD may apply is in those with Motor Neuron Disease. If the condition has not progressed to a level where there is significant functional impairment or indeed, a non functional Support Group would be applicable, the implication of having a diagnosis of MND is severe. Given there is no form of “treatment” to prevent progression it would be appropriate for this NFD to be applied.
NFD - Non Functional Descriptor
I have checked the Decision Makers Guide and there is no additional definition. I think you have to argue your point that there is a risk of death from this disease, however, you will most certainly need to provide medical evidence in support of this, so your doctor must be willing to state that;
1. There is a risk of death from this disease
2. That it is uncontrollable by recognised methods
3. That there is good reason why it is not controllable.
Gordon
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Moderators: Gordon, Gary, BIS, Catherine, Wendy, Kelly, greekqueen, peter, Katherine, Super User, jimmck, Chris