Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
PIP and Bipolar disorder
Hello there,
Has any body had any PIP decisions come through for people with Bipolar disorder? I’ve done a couple of DLA renewals for people with this condition in the last couple of days and was wondering what is likely to happen to them when they move over to PIP.
Both are currently on MRC/LRM. Both have had hospital admissions under section punctuated by long periods of stability where they are pretty independent (although both lack insight when their condition is deteriorating and so need some monitoring - both remain under the CMHT). I can’t see that there will be any period where more than half of the time they have care needs sufficient to qualify for PIP.
Are all of these people going to lose their DLA and in many cases their SDPs? What approaches would you suggest for PIP claims for people with this condition?
I have similar concerns for many of my clients with Schizophrenia, who have often been on DLA for years but are in fact pretty stable on medication for the majority of the time. When doing DLA claims I have usually found enough bits and pieces to keep them on MRC but I can’t see how I am going to manage it for PIP.
Thanks!
I have helped at least one person with schizophrenia whose condition is controlled by weekly depot injections. He got PIP on the grounds of depression rather than the schizophrenia.
I agree it isn’t easy. I have an on-going PIP appeal for a client with Bipolar. The FTT was unsuccessful and we’re currently awaiting the SOR. I have exactly that problem- the client has periods of relative stability as long as the appropriate support and medication is in place and on the face of it seems capable and to have a good insight into her condition but the reality is somewhat different. It really isn’t easy to fit her difficulties into the descriptors however.
I’ve had success with a PIP claim for a bipolar client but we focused on her spells of depression which tend to be for the majority of the time, with a nod to the episodes of mania she occasionally experiences. The claim is reviewed on a yearly basis; 12 month awards.
If they’re under CMHT have they care co-ordinators or are they non CPA?
I wouldn’t worry too much; take the £140 quid a week off them, they’ll relapse and a new claim will succeed. It’s all part of the grand plan!
Edit; I do worry about these… I’m lucky in a way as working hand in hand with the CMHT I only see the really ill people but I know there are a lot of people in the community who are likely to lose out when their assessed need for supervision is no longer as broad as it used to be.
[ Edited: 17 Apr 2015 at 11:50 am by Dan_Manville ]If they’re under CMHT have they care co-ordinators or are they non CPA?
I’m not sure to be honest - alot of the people are definitely still under CMHT and have a specific worker (usually a nurse or social worker) that they will refer to as a care coordinators but do not seem to be on CPA (or at least do not bring their Care Plans with them).
If you are non-CPA can you still have a care-cordinator? Or is this possibly the clients innacurately using a job description that they are familiar with to describe the person who works with them at the CMHT?
In future I’ll try and be more thorough in distuingishing between CPA/non CPA - I’m in the habit of grouping all CMHT users together.
Certainly where I am only people subject to CPA will have a care co-orinator. If your clients are I’d suggest tracking the care co-ordinator down and requesting a copy of your peoples’ Clinical Risk and Needs Assessments. They’re the gold standard as far as evidence goes.
The DWP line on thses cases is that there was still a supervision need covered by the “supervision” descriptors so 1(d), 2(a)(ii) 4(c) 6(c). Whether a Tribunal would agree with that is a different matter.
My experience has been that you just have to say that your clients with Bi-polar / schizophrenia are always affected to some extent in their cooking / eating / dressing / washing / budgeting / socialising, and the DWP seem to go for it where the condition (especially where there’s CMHT involvement) is a serious one. My clients (my speciality is mental health advice for CAB) are mostly being awarded enhanced-rate Daily Living (£83) but no mobility. This is more than middle-rate care and lower-rate mobility DLA, so I don’t rock the boat.
Where my clients don’t get Daily Living, I’m a one-man crusade to get some case law for standard-rate Mobility PIP. If you look at P.116-117 of the PIP Assessment Guide, you’ll see why these people aren’t getting s-r Mob PIP.
, even though the DWP have no business adding the idea that a certain descriptor is only for people with cognitive impairment and not for people with anxiety. The following sentence is the only test that the law sets:
“Could this person for a majority of the time go, alone, to an unfamiliar place safely, to an acceptable standard, repeatedly and in a reasonable time period?”
That’s it. If someone has a mental meltdown with the anxiety of it all, is that “safely”? If s/he gets lost or gets to the other end a gibbering wreck, is that “to an acceptable standard”? If someone couldn’t manage the return journey or to do the journey again the next day, can they do it “repeatedly”? If someone gets lost on the way, it’s quite likely that they won’t do it “in a reasonable time period”. These arguments have worked once, with one decision maker, just as the case was about to go to tribunal. It’s got logic on its side as far as I’m concerned, so I think it’s only a matter of time before the DWP will be forced to amend their assessment guide.
My experience has been that you just have to say that your clients with Bi-polar / schizophrenia are always affected to some extent in their cooking / eating / dressing / washing / budgeting / socialising, and the DWP seem to go for it where the condition (especially where there’s CMHT involvement) is a serious one.
I am profoundly uncomfortable with a suggestion that an adviser might misrepresent the circumstances. I’ve only been doing MH work for a couple of years but I know that there are some people that make a good recovery and one of the difficulties with that is that their income will decrease once entitlement to disability benefits is removed. For instance 50% of people with schizophrenia make a good recovery within 10 years.
I would never dream of misrepresenting a client’s needs; the implications for all my other clients in undermining my standing do not bear thinking about.
If they’re under CMHT have they care co-ordinators or are they non CPA?
I wouldn’t worry too much; take the £140 quid a week off them, they’ll relapse and a new claim will succeed. It’s all part of the grand plan!
Edit; I do worry about these… I’m lucky in a way as working hand in hand with the CMHT I only see the really ill people but I know there are a lot of people in the community who are likely to lose out when their assessed need for supervision is no longer as broad as it used to be.
Me thinks you doth protest too much Dan If your clients got wind of the above comment (and I do get the sarcasm!) your standing may take a knock also.
This is a good debate re PIP mobility, which does seem very hard to get, so I am all for joining the crusade for case law for standard-rate mobility so you don’t need to feel alone disgustedofbridport!
I hope some one can remember , but there is a UT/Commissioners decision approx. 10-15yrs old now which addresses this situation, and it talks about the network of support, formal and informal, and if you can show that the claimants condition is only stable , and will only remain stable then ( Standard PIP Living )Middle Rate Care of DLA is an appropriate award. If I find it I will let you know.