list of illnesses that should automatically qualify for ESA support group

[jazzjazz1]

My partner has Parkinsons Disease and has recently had his ESA stopped. I have been told by several people that he should have never been put in the work activity group and that there is a list of illnesses/diseases that automatically qualify you for the support group. Does anyone know anything about this list? Thanks

[Nystagmite]

The only illness I know of, is terminal.

[45002]

My partner has Parkinsons Disease and has recently had his ESA stopped. I have been told by several people that he should have never been put in the work activity group and that there is a list of illnesses/diseases that automatically qualify you for the support group. Does anyone know anything about this list? Thanks

 

Have you lodged a appeal ?

 

People using this forum can help you with a appeal

 

Have a read of this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?251737-Appealing-or-going-to-a-Tribunal-Some-useful-information

[hensteeth]

The only illness I know of, is terminal.

 

Yes only those with a terminal illness not expecting to see the other side of Christmas.

[Nystagmite]

You can get into the support on the basis of having a physical or mental illness which if found fit for work, could affect your health and /or that of others.

 

But this isn't specific to a certain disability.

[RaeUK]

It rings a bell but I can't put my finger on where. (I may, of course, be thinking of something else entirely!) Anyway, there is this:

 

Employment and Support Allowance requires all but those patients with the most severe illnesses or disabilities to engage in a programme of work-focused interviews and develop a work-related action plan as a condition of receiving the allowance.

If a patient with a severe illness or disability makes a claim for Employment and Support Allowance, they will become members of the Support Group in Employment and Support Allowance. Those in the Support Group will not have to attend interviews with advisers, actively prepare for work nor undertake other return to work activity. However, they will be able to volunteer for help if they do want to consider working.

From the DWP's own site here. Edited August 14, 2012 by RaeUK

[45002]

Support Group Criteria page 24 onwards

 

http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-han

 

From what i read so far you Don't have to be Terminal ill get into the SG !

 

 

jazzjazz1

 

Have you lodged a appeal ?

 

People using this forum can help you with a appeal

 

Have a read of this http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?251737-Appealing-or-going-to-a-Tribunal-Some-useful-information

Edited August 14, 2012 by 45002

[dx100uk]

nope you dont

 

daughter is in spt grp and is certainly not terminal.........

 

special needs status only/

 

dx

[antone]

There is no "list" of specific conditions that will result in someone being placed in the SG.

 

A claimant can meet the SG descriptors, or, as mentioned, be suffering from a terminal illness. Also, there are a couple of regulations which would place a claimant in the SG even if they don't meet either of those conditions. The most obvious is Reg 35, which basically states that if it would endanger the claimant or any other person to demand that they seek work, they should be placed in the SG whether or not they meet the standard SG conditions.

 

In all cases, the DWP Decision Maker can place someone in the SG or WRAG without a medical being conducted. This is unusual, but does happen from time to time.

[hensteeth]

There is no "list" of specific conditions that will result in someone being placed in the SG.

 

A claimant can meet the SG descriptors, or, as mentioned, be suffering from a terminal illness. Also, there are a couple of regulations which would place a claimant in the SG even if they don't meet either of those conditions. The most obvious is Reg 35, which basically states that if it would endanger the claimant or any other person to demand that they seek work, they should be placed in the SG whether or not they meet the standard SG conditions.

 

In all cases, the DWP Decision Maker can place someone in the SG or WRAG without a medical being conducted. This is unusual, but does happen from time to time.

 

Thanks for clearing that up. The original poster, I feel, was asking if there were any specific conditions/illnesses that would mean automatic Support Group status.

 

The only one that I am aware of is if someone presents a form DS1500 (terminal illness not likely to be alive in 6 months time).

All of the other cases are subject to decision by the DM based on evidence.

[hensteeth]

It rings a bell but I can't put my finger on where. (I may, of course, be thinking of something else entirely!) Anyway, there is this:

 

From the DWP's own site here.

 

"If a patient with a severe illness or disability makes a claim for Employment and Support Allowance, they will become members of the Support Group in Employment and Support Allowance."

 

And the definition of that, is what?

 

If it is designed around the descriptors, how on earth is asking someone if they can reach for a pen out of their breast pocket supposed to identify that?

 

On the other hand, is it a decision that is made on the basis of what is put in the ESA50?

I can't see that working as I have evidence going back to 2009/10 when the ESA50 wasn't even looked at by the assessor or even the DM in making the decision! How? because I didn't post, didn't have to - still within the time allowed, the ESA50 until the date the decison was made!

 

I have to go along with the previous posters thoughts on this one. Severe illness - is ???????

 

Should there not be in fact, a list of severe illnesses that do qualify for automatic inclusion on the Support Group?

Edited August 15, 2012 by hensteeth

[jazzjazz1]

If a patient with a severe illness or disability makes a claim for Employment and Support Allowance, they will become members of the Support Group in Employment and Support Allowance.

 

And the definition of that, is what?

 

If it is designed around the descriptors, how on earth is asking someone if they can reach for a pen out of their breast pocket supposed to identify that?

 

On the other hand, is it a decision that is made on the basis of what is put in the ESA50?

 

I have to go along with the previous posters thoughts on this one. Severe illness - is ???????

 

Should there not be in fact, a list of severe illnesses that do qualify for automatic inclusion on the Support Group?

 

I feel there should be a list and not just of terminal illness but for progressive diseases too, the people suffering from diseases such as Parkinsons, MS, Motor Neuron Disease etc should not also have to suffer being put through the ringer by ATOS! My partner watched the Dispatches program and also the Panorama program and now feels he won't stand a chance of getting anything so the depression is now starting to set in, he isn't listening to any advice and has stuck his head in the sand all thanks to the assessment system the government have in place and when the changes come in (Universal Credit etc) it may be even worse for those with diseases like this. Thanks for all advice given by the way

[worried33]

However what can happen is eg. if a illness typically causes a condition that would fit a descriptor I would expect that person to get that descriptor providing there is medical evidence of the illness.

 

Parts of the handbook say this, eg. there is parts that mention on aids if the person's illness typically allows such an aid to be used they must be assumed to be able to use that aid regardless of they use it or not.

 

We coming back to assumptions and probability again which is something the DWP likes to use for decisions.

 

So based on this I expect certian medical conditions do make SG at least easier to get.

[assisted blonde]

Can anyone tell me what would happen if you have been classed as Terminal but you survive longer than 6 months or so but your illness is still terminal? do you get penalized for surviving?

[Nystagmite]

Parts of the handbook say this, eg. there is parts that mention on aids if the person's illness typically allows such an aid to be used they must be assumed to be able to use that aid regardless of they use it or not.

 

I was once told by DLA to use aids. Despite me saying aids don't work.

[hensteeth]

I was once told by DLA to use aids. Despite me saying aids don't work.

 

Hey yes my wife too!

 

Her claim for Attendance Allowance was refused only on the basis that aids or adaptions could be used which would mitigate the needs. OK I go along with that, but at what expense, time and trouble. Her needs were recognised to the extent that I claimed they were. Medical evidence proved that.

They did say that with aids and adaptions her needs would not be frequent enough throughout the day and would not amount to 1 hour a day.

 

During an interchange of views that I had with the DWP over this it was suggested that a walk in bath, stair lift, an easy chair that automatically lifted when you wanted to get out of it and an adjustable bed with riser could be used.

 

Who is going to pay for that lot? I could, but why should I? Surely this benefit isn't geared to someone's means.

 

The official answer was to 'contact social services who will no doubt help'.

 

I gave up after that - there was no point in arguing any further. They had their opinion and I had mine. Unfortunately their opinion carries more weight!

[antone]

Can anyone tell me what would happen if you have been classed as Terminal but you survive longer than 6 months or so but your illness is still terminal? do you get penalized for surviving?

 

Not as such, no. You would eventually be referred for a WCA, but they don't check up after 6 months and say "Oi you! Why are you still alive?"

[assisted blonde]

Thank you Antone it dosnt affect me as I am still employed but I was just interested

[hensteeth]

However what can happen is eg. if a illness typically causes a condition that would fit a descriptor I would expect that person to get that descriptor providing there is medical evidence of the illness.

 

Parts of the handbook say this, eg. there is parts that mention on aids if the person's illness typically allows such an aid to be used they must be assumed to be able to use that aid regardless of they use it or not.

 

We coming back to assumptions and probability again which is something the DWP likes to use for decisions.

 

So based on this I expect certian medical conditions do make SG at least easier to get.

 

I think you will find that having any illness does not entitle you to ESA. It's the inability to carry out some or all of the descriptors that counts as long as the points those descriptors give add up to 15 or more.

 

Likewise medical evidence of an illness is not relevant. Medical evidence of the inabilities caused by that illness is more important.

 

I have various conditions that together, including the side effects of the drugs I take make it impossible to barely function, never mind work. There is no argument about that.

However, I have yet to find any descriptor that I could genuinely, without telling some white lies, gain points that would add up to more than 15.

 

Yes I have got used to being this way and make the best that is available. And yes, my pain threshold is such, now that I can cope, because I have had years of coping, is far higher than the average person plus you tend not to feel that much anyhow on the daily intake of Morphine.

 

What I am trying to say is that medical practitioners would assume that people with just some of my problems would have major difficulties, their major difficulties are minor to me.

 

Who then should be granted ESA if they were totally honest from the outset?

Those that just couldn't handle the pain or those that had the same pain but considered it just a nuisance?

 

It is readilly accepted that with just one of my conditions, all sufferers should automatically be given Support Group status.

However that would include those that felt very poorly and those that felt very poorly, but put a brave face on and persevered beyond.

There are degrees to be considered

[Nystagmite]

Likewise medical evidence of an illness is not relevant.

 

Surely it is? I've had reports for learning difficulties. They have always stated these are my difficulties in these areas.

[worried33]

I think you will find that having any illness does not entitle you to ESA.

 

I never said that.

 

Its very probable that certian conditions are flagged up as unlikely to get points and others more likely to get points regardless of how bad someone is affected.

 

Quite obvious actually, this is why we get some people getting points without having a face to face WCA at all, it just happens they have the right type of illness on their form, others turn up for a WCA but get put in SG after a very short assessment, again due to having right type of illness. Then others who fit the descriptors but their illness typically doesnt make other people fit descriptors so they dont get the points.

[Dilizjo]

Hey yes my wife too!

 

Her claim for Attendance Allowance was refused only on the basis that aids or adaptions could be used which would mitigate the needs. OK I go along with that, but at what expense, time and trouble. Her needs were recognised to the extent that I claimed they were. Medical evidence proved that.

They did say that with aids and adaptions her needs would not be frequent enough throughout the day and would not amount to 1 hour a day.

 

During an interchange of views that I had with the DWP over this it was suggested that a walk in bath, stair lift, an easy chair that automatically lifted when you wanted to get out of it and an adjustable bed with riser could be used.

 

Who is going to pay for that lot? I could, but why should I? Surely this benefit isn't geared to someone's means.

 

The official answer was to 'contact social services who will no doubt help'.

 

I gave up after that - there was no point in arguing any further. They had their opinion and I had mine. Unfortunately their opinion carries more weight!

 

Bad official answer there tbh.... the social worker that visited my mother to reassess her needs said that according to their guidelines it is not an individuals right to shower every day they can only aspire to..... meaning they won't pay out to enable people to maintain a hygienic lifestyle with dignity.

[Nystagmite]

Does that include people whose disabilities mean they have to shower that often? Why shouldn't someone be able to shower everyday because they're disabled?

[Dilizjo]

exactly Nystagmite as far as I am aware all human beings regardless of situation, race, creed etc have the right to live a safe and dignified life, sadly this government seem to be completely unaware of this.

I will add that I managed to retain my mother's care but it took a lot of determination and gnashing of teeth

[gregbythesea]

I never said that.

 

Its very probable that certian conditions are flagged up as unlikely to get points and others more likely to get points regardless of how bad someone is affected.

 

Quite obvious actually, this is why we get some people getting points without having a face to face WCA at all, it just happens they have the right type of illness on their form, others turn up for a WCA but get put in SG after a very short assessment, again due to having right type of illness. Then others who fit the descriptors but their illness typically doesnt make other people fit descriptors so they dont get the points.

 

I've just picked up on this thread and in particular your reply.

 

If the illness itself drives the points factor, subject of course to degrees, how can it be the case then that according to another forum I am on, one that deals specifically with my major conditon, all and I mean all managed to be accepted onto ESA in one group or another, yet I received 0 points?

 

Also it is a well known fact that certain medications should result in acceptance onto ESA automatically, why then not me?

 

There was enough medical evidence sent in proving the conditon, the complexity of it, the seriousness of it as well as evidence of the medication that had been prescribed.

 

The answer is simple I didn't realise that you had to spend an eternity filling out the ESA50 and reasonably expected the DWP to contact my healthcare providers instead.

 

So it seems that no matter what you conditon is, what drugs you take, you have just as much chance of being awarded ESA than someone who has a 'bad cold' if you expect the decision to be related to the conditon itself.