I have just read King's Lynn and Norfolk Borough Council's guide to this, posted on Rightsnet. It was very interesting and made a number of helpful points but says

"... A claim for DLA care component can only be made solely on the grounds of supervision needs, as none of the symptoms are such as to require attention ...".

Hmmm ... up to a point. But what about prompting, soothing, communicating, social, guidance ... etc.?

Each case is different but I'd certainly check to see if any of these are required more often or more intensively than for a child of the same age without ADHD, in particular prompting to carry through an activity or series of activities.

In hindsight, perhaps that statement was a little too black and white, and we could have explained the logic behind it a little more clearly. With these children, each case is so different that one can't just say this is what you do, and this is how you make the claim - The child is perfectly healthy in every other respect.

We made that point with the prospect of a possible Appeal at some point in the future - the majority of our applications always get at least as far as reconsideration stage - Chairmen (in this region at least) tend to equate "attention in connection with bodily functions" as meaning just that, and as it's such a grey area, and as the over-riding symptoms of ADHD are behavioural problems, one tends to then get into endless discussions as to what constitutes attention and supervision etc.

We have had such "discussions" in the past: Chairs also lean toward the view that prompting, communicating, soothing, guidance etc are functions that any good parent would carry out with any child in normal health, and are an integral part of the learning process in any normal parent/child relationship.

I must agree that with ADHD children, it is a very thin line between the two - but if you look at the trouble (to put it politely) an ADHD child can get into if not constantly supervised, then clearly that is the best line to take: but by all means use the attention angle as well.

Mike

Where I had an awful school report in one case which seemed to blow supervision totally out of the water, I developed an attention argument based around motivational needs for get out of and into bed wash and cleaning his teeth, with arguments on eating motivational needs as well (not easily sitting with school saying no problems with eating there). Every parent does these things but there comes an age (12 in this case) that a parent spending twenty minutes getting teeth brushed is way outside of the expected.

But which left a great gap in school days, plugged using a potentially very cheeky argument based on CDLA/3737/2002 (blind pupil's classroom assistant provides attention in conenction with bodily function of sight) backed up with a fantastic paediatrician report stating that such an assistant was essential to provide a consistent structure for academic progress (not so good but possibly Fairey-able??) but also about behavioural issues in class and that the assistant would help him make sense of social situations and overcome as much as possible emotional distress experienced with slight alterations in structures.

Appeal allowed on supervision and attention (almost a disappointment as I think it takes the 'is learning/thinking a bodily function' argument right to the edge and I was thinking it all never stood a chance). (I think learning is a bodily functions as you have to see hear and write to do it and in this case without an assistant to provide structure the child would do none of those things)

But generally I've found night time attention easier to frame an argument on than day time. As Mike says, they're all so very different.

I recall a Commissioners decision once upon a time wherein he posed the question - what is the point of supervision if not be able to monitor a particular situation and to provide attention as and when necessary - which is what I think I was getting at when I said that Supervision would be the primary ground for a claim.

Within the school enviroment - if the child has been statemented then the number of hours per week that they receive special needs teaching can count as attention over and above - other than that, school reports tend to paint a better picture of the child - effects of slow release Concerta etc and non emotional relationship between teachers and child.