I have a couple of tribunals coming up where I am trying to get the care component for clients whose disability is deafness. I'm going to be relying mainly on SoS v Fairey and communication needs, but I like to have a back-up plan and wonder if there are any useful commissioners decision re the cooking test and deaf claimants?

Looked in all the usual places and can't find anything at all.

Sue

Sorry to be obtuse, but on what would you be basing the inability of a deaf person to cook? The only references to this I have ever seen is that they may allege they cannot hear when a pan is boiling dry, but you don't have to be deaf to do that, just in another room (I do it all the time).

I'm basing it on what the claimant said.

Basically similar to what you said but arguing that a severe hearing impediment means that they can't do several things at the same time - eg they can either watch things on the hob to make sure they are safe or watch their hands as they peel vegetables etc, but they can't turn their attention to peel vegetables (say) while listening to make sure that things are boiling steadily.

I think it's likely to fail but just wondered if there were any angles I hadn't thought of.

I really don't think there's much milage in the cooking test, other than it may well bring a smile to the Chairman's face....

stick to the main picture - attention is required for a large part of the waking day in connection with the bodily function of hearing - we have just got DLA mid care for a client who cannot hear and has no power of speech - although he can use BSL no one he knows uses it -

This client is a professional in the architectual field and needs to be able to communicate effectively on a professional and social level....only got it on recon after giving DM a list of Com's decisions and the odd HOL decision....have they heard of Mallinson/Fairey etc nowadays....

They hopefully will have by the end of today ...

I wouldn’t hold out much faith in them taking any notice of commissioners. I took a case to tribunal last year. A young man with visual impairment. He previously had MR Care/LR Mob. Lost it on renewal. Tribunal awards LR Care/LR Mob without too much trouble.

Appealed to the commissioner who in January this year awards MR Care based on, among other things, attention required with seeing in his workplace (2 years into a 4 year apprenticeship). So far so good. On the current renewal claim (current award expires in the summer) we make it perfectly clear that no change in condition and no change, or foreseeable change in his work and the amount of attention required.

Decision just back. Awarded LR mob only. Unbloodybelievable! Strongly worded letter in the post that same day.

Sadly, perfectly believable.

i'm currently advising a DLA for a deaf person, turns out there are other family members in the same situation and I anticipate an interesting time.

Sue, do you have the Derbyshire DLA and AA case law pack? If so, have a look at pages 112 to 118. If not I could send you a fax, perhaps? Some intersting and maybe helpful decisions in there.

Did you not have the Pack on this site once upon a time ? I seem to remember downloading it from somewhere...

My personal view is that how far a deaf person qualifies for care component depends largely on how much time they spend necessarily or reasonably in the company of hearing people with whom they need /want to communicate. If it's most of the day (eg, in a "normal" full time working environment, then it has to be middle rate. If less than that, lower rate (eg soemone who only wqrks part-time and otherwise lives within the Deaf community). There must be very few Deaf people who live so much in the Deaf community that they only occasionally have any need to communicate with hearing people, but if there are you might wonder whether their needs are enough even for lowest rate.

"If less than that, lower rate (eg soemone who only wqrks part-time and otherwise lives within the Deaf community). There must be very few Deaf people who live so much in the Deaf community that they only occasionally have any need to communicate with hearing people, but if there are you might wonder whether their needs are enough even for lowest rate".

Could you define more clearly the expression "the deaf community" .....I ask because all the deaf clients I can remember seeing have all lived in the same community as the rest of us. Whilst our Society appears to be only too keen to put people in little boxes - mental health community, disabled community, deaf community, I didn't think we WRA had started doing it.

I also ask because I am having some difficulty in relating the level of an award with whether or not (in another person's judgement) a deaf person really needs it: I always thought an award of DLA was dependent upon the severity of the persons disability......

All people who suffer from deafness are entitled to the same quality of life as you or I no matter what community they live in. Deafness isn't an illness, it's an inconvenient barrier which can be overcome through alternative means of communication. One of the ways they can begin to achieve this is by obtaining awards of the middle rate of the care component. I would have thought that our job description basically says that we should be helping to maximise clients benefit income where there is entitlement: not to be making judgemental decisions as to whether they really need it...

For what its worth i didn't read ariadne's post that way at all. I think all she was trying to get across was that each case is based on the facts and what is care and attention reasonably required for one may be different from another. Not exactly an earth shattering revelation but not to my mind any indication of prejudice at all. FYI there are plenty of "deaf communities", see for example, http://www.rnid.org.uk/howwehelp/our_services/care_services/residential/

I really don't want to turn this into a bunfight but Mike has a good point that i think is well made. To reiterate, taking a blanket approach to any client should be avoided, for obvious reasons. The argument that the rate of DLA that a claimant should receive is somehow dependent 'largely on how much time they spend necessarily or reasonably in the company of hearing people with whom they need /want to communicate' is, in my opinion, complete nonsense.

I would remind you that the test of need for assistance in DLA is in relation to what would happen in an ideal situation, not the real-lfe situation. So, for example, a claimant doesn't need to show that they are actually receiving the personal care that they require, but instead simply demonstrate that because of their impairment, they would benefit if they received that level of personal attention. And if there is a reason that many deaf people prefer the company of other deaf people, it is because of the difficulties experienced in their interactions with hearing people.

In the argument above, the reason claimed as justification for awarding a lower rate of benefit is directly influenced by a factor that arises from an impairment - if you tried to argue that a wheelchair user shouldn't get HRM DLA because they don't get out of the house much, you'd be laughed out of the tribunal (i hope). I don't see what is substantively different to someone effectively arguing the same thing in relation to hearing loss.

there is a fairly definite idea of a separate deaf community, within the deaf community itself, (sorry for the tautology), pretty much based on the language BSL, although, like all communities, there isn't one voice, but a diversity of views and opinions. i was unaware of this until my deaf neighbours moved next door...they are lovely neighbours - the lady has been profoundly deaf from birth, and is unable to speak- ...her husband was also severely hearing impaired from birth, and as a child went to a special school for the deaf, where he was taught to lip-read, and is able to communicate vocally, with some speech impediment, and, much room for misunderstanding - lip reading has it's limitations.
you can imagine that not being able to speak is very isolating, and Jill is only able to communicate properly with other deaf people - she has a good number of friends, made, i think, originally through the RNID club, the social hub of the community, and they can have good chinwags in their own expressive language, pretty essential for sanity, i think...
George, on the other hand, has always worked and socialized in the world of hearing people, and although it is _far_ from unproblematic, he doesn't want to restrict himself to the deaf community quite in the same way that his wife does. she is much happier in that community, but on the other hand, she has her husband to mediate for her with the wider world, and she is heavily reliant on him...

it's not easy...

I'm aware of the Disability Alliance law packs which I find very useful - there are others? Please tell me more!

I think they may be the ones I was thinking of ...........

Just to say I did deliberately select the expression "Deaf community" (with a capital D) becasue I am aware that in amny areas there are people who actively think of themselves as a separate linguistic group within society and would be offended to be called disabled when they merely have different abilities.

The main reason for an award of DLA care component to a Deaf person is usually based around the need (and I did say also wish) to communicate with hearing people. So if they need to do this in order to lead the sort of life they want to lead, the amount of help they will need goes into the equation. If they have most of their families and friends, social life and work within the Deaf community they may not need to communicate with hearing people so much and not even want to. That's all I was saying. It's a starting point and not an absolute rule, rather on the lines of "blind old ladies get attendance allowance, especially if they have gone blind in a fairly short period".

Derbyshire Welfare Rights DLA and AA case law pack costs £20 (or £15 on CD) but since the latest edition is a year old there might be a discount on it now. (Don't quote me on that!!) Further info available on 01773 728272 or I can fax you the relevant pages for deaf claimants free gratis and for nothing.