Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
activity 1d
would appreciate a sounding board for this descriptor.
a huge number of people with a learning disability struggle with unfamiliar journeys but this can often be overcome by a family member/friend etc doing a trial run or supporting them the first few times they do a journey.
I’m currently doing a submission for a client like that who would probably be ok with a new journey once he has been accompanied to do it the first time.
trying to play devils advocate, is it likely that it could be argued that this isnt enough and that it would still be a relatively unfamiliar journey after one run through?
I may be over thinking this now as its half five and ive already had several internal debates with myself over the daily living tasks.
Hi Steven,
surely the point is that the journey ceases to be unfamiliar once he’s done it.
Or are you saying that “unfamiliar” is less than “unknown”? In other words that the journey goes from being “unknown” to “unfamiliar” to “familiar” the more often he does it. I think that would be too restrictive, and that “unknown” journeys are just one example of “unfamiliar” journeys.
As well as that what would happen if something disrupted his journey? Could he cope with a bus or train being cancelled, a road being closed etc.?
I’d agree with Cordelia, except for saying that it probably takes more than one journey for it to become familiar. Perhaps that batch of journeys, which may be different from individual to individual, would be the unfamiliar journeys while unknown remains that never travelled.
According, then, to the above logic, where the journey remains unfamiliar for a while and where the benefit claimant only needs someone with him the first time he makes that journey, he is then - potentially - unable (the first time) and able (the second time) to undertake an unfamiliar journey . If he has no problems with unexpected changes and public transport, would he score points under this descriptor?
But even if one particular journey moves from unfamiliar to familiar there is always going to be another unfamiliar journey to test against for this descriptor. So unless you are thinking of this versus 1f its all a bit academic isn’t it?
I have to say that I was thinking much the same thing Billy.
Hi Steven,
surely the point is that the journey ceases to be unfamiliar once he’s done it.
Or are you saying that “unfamiliar” is less than “unknown”? In other words that the journey goes from being “unknown” to “unfamiliar” to “familiar” the more often he does it. I think that would be too restrictive, and that “unknown” journeys are just one example of “unfamiliar” journeys.
As well as that what would happen if something disrupted his journey? Could he cope with a bus or train being cancelled, a road being closed etc.?
this is pretty much what i thought of when i started looking at ways the tribunal might argue against entitlement to the descriptor.
then though i considered what billy had said about their always being a new journey so it should apply in any case.
I can easily see a tribunal arguing it shouldn’t though.
A couple of observations.
First of all, personally with my VI I would absolutely agree with Gareth that the transition of a journey from unfamiliar to familiar is not as simple as it becoming by default a familiar one once it’s been completed once. I can undertake an unfamiliar journey only if I plan in advance and have my iPhone, iPad and monocular with me as assistance aids. In recent years I have realised that it takes me multiple journeys on a route, however short, for it to become familiar in any sense. I only seem able to digest specific aspects at first such as the start or end. I will note landmarks but not really position them in an order or relate to them as representing a specific part of the journey even if I’ve done a journey accompanied and done it several times. It varies hugely but I’d say most unfamiliar routes become familiar to me after around 5 or 6 attempts.
Translating that to someone with a learning disability I would expect something similar.
However, all journeys are subject to change. That could be an actual physical diversion/change of route or something as simple as the sudden demolition of a building. What was supposedly familiar can easily throw me off course. Worth bearing in mind.
Also worth bearing in mind that such theoretical journeys only become familiar when you give them your attention at key points. The extent to which that is possible with certain impairments is up for debate. If you’re easily distracted then that will impair your ability to map a journey in your head etc.
Have to say I would also be looking at f though as stated.
I’m with Mike and Cordelia on this, especially in relation to .how a small change can render a familiar journey unfamiliar again.
I can think of two examples just off the top of my head. One was a client with a learning difficulty who had to re-learn how to manage the journey from home to local college when the colour of the bus she needed to catch changed. Another was a client who found a mobile unit suddenly blocking his usual route to a local venue (and who had a full-blown panic attack as a result).
The following extract from the PIPS assessment guide may be of assistance;
“Small disruptions and unexpected changes, such as road works and changed bus-stops, are commonplace when following journeys and consideration should be given to whether the claimant would be able to carry out the activity as described if such commonplace disruptions occur”.
(p.117)
Surely the purpose of being accompanised is to ‘familiarise’ yourself with the journey? I would of course argue all of the points raised by Mike and Cordeli and see if I can gain support from the line of argument proposed by Pete, but that would not put me of arguing it on the plain meaning of the word ‘unfamiliar’ alone.