PIP discrimination regarding PIP and Medical Evidence UPDATE

Hi Carol I am experiencing something similar as in they continue to cite the same thing at me as the reason for refusal "lack of specialist input". I have M.E. Fibromyalgia ADHD and Autism (awaiting confirmation on the Autism, but I believe this is just an exercise I have to go through to have something in black and white).

My issue is that with my ADHD/Autism and the fatigure/brainfog combined I am literally not able to access specialsts. I am unable to plan appointments, follow through with appointments due to my executive functioning processing issues and disorganisation, inability to fill in forms, complete multi-step tasks and so forth - basically I just dont Compute and get the blue screen of death if I try and I do try.. combined with the inability to communicate due to shut downs, melt downs and slow processing speed which means I am unable to respond in the moment and - you get the idea.

On top of that, planning journeys is another momentus task and it takes me 3 or 4 times longer than a non-disabled person to do such a task and I am unable to drive (due to undiagnosed dyspraxia my GP thinks) I cannot go to unfamiliar places alone which limits my ability to travel and it takes me around a week to plan one journey with multiple checks, and the need to stick to certain routes.

combine the two issues above and its literally almost impossible for me to make an appointment, follow through and plan the journey to get to that appointment. So, whilst I may be able to do that after a huge effort with the inability to do anything else - it leaves me with a bit of a problem... access to anything.

cue my assessment: The HP focused almost entirely on my lack of specialist input and about 90% of the questions I was asked focused on this in particular.

I have begun an MR and this is how I am handling it - I will share a few excerpts of what I am sending or have already sent. I would please ask that anyone using these do not directly copy and paste them and I cannot take any responsibility if you choose to use anything like this. This is simply what I have done and am doing. Use at your own risk.

1) The assessment focused on my lack of recent specialist input. However, this is a direct result of my primary functional impairment: my profound difficulty with executive functions related to planning, organisation, and task initiation. This functional barrier prevented me from organizing and attending the necessary appointments to gather that specific evidence.

2) The assessor’s use of my inability to organize specialist input as evidence against my needs is circular reasoning and exemplifies the very systemic failures that have created these barriers in the first place.

3) I have consistently experienced barriers in communication, understanding, and participation due to my ADHD, autism, and physical conditions. Rather than making reasonable adjustments, the process has often penalised me for the effects of my disabilities — for example, difficulties with communication, executive function, and accessing appropriate support.

4) The PA4 report and decision appears to penalise me for the barriers created by my disabilities, rather than recognising the support I need.

I have liberally scattered points from the Equality act and their own Equality guidelines throughout and I have reiterated and repeated these points more than once to get my point across, if they will not accept what I am saying the first time, then I will continue to press harder and harder on this particular point.

It is inhumane to weaponize the functional impact of a persons disabilities against them and I have used those actual words! I am not allowing them to get away with this. I am not angry I am just Done with the excuses and the abelism and them disregarding the law.

Hi LL26 Thank you This is not the opening of my MR it is some references from it and my complaint letter as well, just to give people some idea of what I have said in response to the "lack of specialist input! I don't want to hijack someone elses thread here but I have included evidence to back up what I have said, including statements and letters and evidence I used in a tribunal for DLA in 2003 and past gp records outlining the functional problems I had then as a child through to adulthood even though I was not diagnosed with ADHD/Autism etc. They have recieved my first pack of statements and evidence and I will be posting my next pack tomorrow, the final pack will be done when I recieve my SARs which I have requested from the psychologists I saw over the course of a decade or more and then my most recent supporting letter from my private psychiatrist from last month. I am hitting them hard! with both barrels - I am completely hyper focused on this and have been for 18 months or more and I am and have been pre-empting them as I am now on medication and finally have the capacity for some sort of focus, although its killing me - but the justice sensitivity is overriding everything now and I am not doing this just for me, but for all of us. <3

"I must remember that I am asking for a judgment, not giving one."

That is pure gold, thank you so much. I could so easily fall into that trap! We want the system to be right for everyone. We are admirable! But the advice on focussing on your own case alone first is sound, of course. I wish you every possible success!

Hello Everyone.
I have had my Tribunal and been upgraded from standard to enhanced Daily living allowance, and been given standard Mobility allowance. The DWP have 28 days to decide if they'll appeal.
Some things to note that may help you, if you're facing a tribunal:
Case Law;
CPIP/2651/2015 - Very important ! "Expert Opinion not of inherently more value than patient's"
The tribunal will form it's own opinions not simply accept the views of the HP. You do not have to have an expert opinion to counter the HPs opinion. Your own experience can suffice. Also evidence of a family member or neighbour or friend is relevant. You are not assumed to be making it up because you haven't a professionals opinion.
CDLA/2701/2010 2011 (UKUT) 183 ACC - where the evidence of GP and HP differs, Tribunal must distil the value and limitations of both. In other words your GPs evidence will not be dismissed out of hand. they are respected professionals who probably have long experience of your disability.
CDLA/636/2009 UKUT140(AAC) If a Tribunal prefers the evidence of one medical opinion over another it must give adequate explanation. In other words the tribunal must adequately explain why if it considers the HP report more significant than the patients own evidence or their GPs evidence.
I found the Tribunal very stressful. My daughter who is studying Psychology gave me the following advice when i was working myself into an anxiety attack several days before the hearing :
The tribunal is "inquisitive" not an inquisition.
They are there to help me achieve the right decision.
This is an opportunity to get help
Lack of understanding of the condition is an innocent "naivety" not disbelief.
You don't have to justify the physiological basis of the illness - particularly important if like me you suffer from a condition that does not yet have a physical diagnostic tool such as a blood test or x-ray to confirm your diagnosis.
It won't help you to get extreme anxiety before the hearing. So hold on to these thoughts.
Give the Tribunal your own evidence as factually as you can. When did you last go out, cook, bathe, etc. be factual.
The DWP didn't participate in my hearing. But the panel will press you for an explanation of your daily limitations. For example I have to choose what I am able to achieve each day - if anything. If those choices mean I can't do one of the daily living activities that day - they will wanted to know why I was making that choice.

What I would do differently;
I spent too much effort and time in preparing my appeal justifying the physiolgy of my disease- CFS. I have suffered as a consequence of the pschosomatic view of my illness which for decades has permeated medicine and wider society. I have an almost PTSD response to any external consideration of my illness and feel I must address the probability of subconcious prejudice. I don't think it served any practical purpose for the Tribunal.

Of more use would have been to use my limited energy to try to record my daily activities and limitations. If you can, or if you have someone at home who can, make a personal record. When you're awake or asleep. When you're in too much pain to function. When your brain fog has resulted in doing something silly, or dangerous, or stopped you being able to complete a task. What you've eaten or not etc
It's difficult to be exact sometimes, for example -I can check what time I wake up, but can't be exact about when I fell asleep - so I try to note what was the last thing on the TV I remembered, or the last thing on the radio I remember. I check the schedule and assume I've fallen asleep half way through. If i've had a flare-up for several days and can't record that much. I record that i haven't kept the record because I had a flare-up those days.
I would pay my GP to write a report of my symptoms. I was told that because the GPs evidence is effectively heresay- ie only what you've told them, that it has no value. That arguement applies to the DWPs assessment but not the Courts - they have to justify ignoring a GPs statement.

The process makes you feel that you must have idependent specialist evidence to support your claim, and that your GPs evidence is of no value -that is NOT the legal position if you get to a Tribunal.
Give the Court as much factual evidence about your own personal experience as possible. Make your own daily record.
Get a statement from your GP even if they can only repeat your information.
Don't criticise the individuals involved in reaching the DWP award. Point out where the assessment is wrong. Make sure your assessment is recorded- ask permission to record it yourself at the start of the HP assessment. You can submit your recording to the court when there is any discrepancy in what the HP reports and what you actually said. Particularly important when something has been distorted by lack of context.
I honestly beleive that the difficulties that are arising during assessments are the result of DWP internal policy and practises. CMs may be able to appreciate the absurdity of some of the HP conclusions but can't intervene. And HPs are trained to consider current treatments in reaching their decisions. People involved are effectively "disempowered" by the restrictions placed upon them in their working environment. Don't take it personally it will make you ill. Focus on addressing on what's gone wrong in the process for you.

I wanted to get this down first because people may be going through this now. I haven't managed to read every response yet but will respond to each when I have the energy. Hope this all helps some of you . x