Registering as disabled?

[gyzmo]

Sorry if this sounds daft, but what happens if you are diagnosed with a condition that classifies you as protected under the Disability Discrimination Act but your health / day to day activities are not actually affected?

 

Do you need to register as being disabled? Is there any help that comes along with it or is it only if the disability affect you in some way?

 

This isn't for me, btw, it's for a friend.

[Bookworm]

The condition would have to affect you, I guess, as most of the benefits are available on a rising scale, the more disabled you are, the more help you're entitled to (in theory anyway).

 

At work, it would protect you from discrimination if the employer fails to make reasonable adjustment to your condition, for example. But if the condition doesn't affect you or your living/working conditions, then there's no need for adjustments.

 

I can't think of any condition that would allow one to be registered disabled and yet the disability doesn't affect you. I'm intrigued. How would a person know they have that disability if it doesn't affect them in the first place? :-?

[gyzmo]

Its a medical condition that does not affect health with treatment - I don't really want to say more than that.

 

Thanks.

[caledfwlch]

I am Diabetic, and from what I have read, Diabetics are covered under the Disability acts in terms of discrimination at work etc, but I don't think you get any other help whatsoever, other than free prescriptions.

 

Though of course there are plenty of things that can go wrong leading to a worse "disability"

[seftonview]

Hi Gyzmo,

 

Sorry for the late reply. It's difficult to pin down a specific answer on the limited information you've given. If you wish, PM me with further, more specific details of the condition and I'll signpost you.

 

If you have a mooch around this forum you'll see I have a history of providing strong advice on this subject, so your information is safe with me.

 

SV

[Bookworm]

And I can vouch for that too. ;-)

[count orlok]

AFAIK there is no longer a register for the disabled, being in receipt of for example DLA would classify you as being disabled. Some people with apparent disabilities do not consider themselves to be disabled and find it insulting to be classified as such. Consequently the "register" has been closed, to say nothing of how such a register could be misappropriated by the wrong "types". The only class of people who are now registered are not the sort you would want to be associated with.

[ads2014]

AFAIK there is no longer a register for the disabled, being in receipt of for example DLA would classify you as being disabled. Some people with apparent disabilities do not consider themselves to be disabled and find it insulting to be classified as such. Consequently the "register" has been closed, to say nothing of how such a register could be misappropriated by the wrong "types". The only class of people who are now registered are not the sort you would want to be associated with.

 

You are slightly incorrect. Being in receipt of DLA also does not automatically class you as disabled. This is because the definition of disability in both cases are different, a person who has DLA however does have evidence that another organisation accepts that they are disabled. People diagnosed with cancer, MS and HIV are the only people automatically disabled under the DDA.

[mkb]

Being in receipt of DLA also does not automatically class you as disabled.

 

What on earth do you mean by this?

 

A recipient has to go through so many hoops & PROVE their case before they get a penny from DLA so dunno how you can say what you have.

 

Can you explain please?

[ads2014]

What on earth do you mean by this?

 

A recipient has to go through so many hoops & PROVE their case before they get a penny from DLA so dunno how you can say what you have.

 

Can you explain please?

 

Absolutely,

 

For the record I myself am disabled and also receiving DLA and I did not intend to suggest that those who get DLA are not disabled under the DDA, far from it.

 

In answer to your question a recepient has to prove their case that they are entitled to DLA under the definition under Section 72 of the Social Security and Contributions Act 1992, whereas the DDA definition is completely different.

 

DLA looks at a persons care and mobility needs so therefore it is very specific whereas the DDA looks at the disability, not exclusively to care or mobility needs - In actual fact treatment is disregarded when it comes to the DDA definition, whereas treatment is taken into account with DLA as it may change the support the person has, which may affect their award.

 

In actual fact the DDA definition may cover more people than those who get DLA.

 

It should also be noted that the decision of whether someone is disabled under the DDA can only be made in a judicial decision in a ruling by a Judge in either a Tribunal or Court.