News Item 6 July - Exploring the reasons for the low level of employment among DLA recipients

I note there is no mention of the fact that as soon as a DLA claimant takes up work, the claim comes under scrutiny, and often results in reduced or loss of DLA!

Cannot see where this report is a problem. Looks to me to have highlighted lots of problems with the way DLA is administered.

Yes DLA is advised as a part of income maximisation. I have no problem with that. I cannot really see any point in any WR adviser helping someone to apply for DLA unless the claimant has an arguable case based on their care needs / disabilities. Equally I cannot see why any WR adviser wouldn’t advise claiming if there is an arguable case. I do not think the negative comments of the report are aimed at WR advisers.

The inappropriate advice to claim DLA springs mainly from job advisers and jodbcentre staff who suggest claiming DLA as a blanket response to anyone who says thay have a health problem.

With regard to exaggeration, I am old enough to remember DLA (and for that matter incapacity benefit) being introduced. I recall being surprised at the time about the structure of “self assessment” applications with its obvious drawback..

From memory there were two drivers to this structure - firstly there was a wish to save on the high cost of Doctors fees both in applications and disputes. Secondly it was pointed out that the best information about disability was from the disabled person themselves or their main carers.

To begin with, a number of claimants did get applications passed purely on their self assessed forms. The goal posts have shifted ever since away from that start with ever greater medical evidence and fairly technical care details being required (although I notice the structure has never actually changed). This leads to any applicant of average articulacy failing to understand what is required by the application form and consequently in danger of being refused - without their disabilities or care needs being fairly assessed.

In practice therefore applicants are put into the position that they have to stress their disabilities in order to get them considered. There is a thin line between “stressing” and “exaggeration”. As a WR adviser I take responsibility to advise the applicant appropriately on this.

The report is right on the button when they say applicants are embarrassed when being advised to do this. I agree this is commonplace and it is a measure of most applicants’ honesty. But it is the system that puts them in this position - not advisers.

It is a perverse system that makes an applicant feel they are exaggerating in order to get their claims considered fairly.

One thing that the report did not touch on that I also find frequently when helping DLA applicants is how often it depresses the applicant to see their disabilities listed and detailed. They often say to me - “I didn’t realise I was that bad”. It is natural because everybody has to find a way of coping day to day and it can be a shock when being forced to confront often severe disabilities. I do not like having to upset people just to help them get benefits they are entitled to - but there it is.

Another perverse result of this system.