DLA assessments by 2013...Autism as whipping boy again?

Post Reply New Topic

Clearly they don't, which is something of a contradiction of the first-year plan for actioning the 2009 Autism Act, which is a very pro-active and helpful document covering a lot of problems quite well, which is clearly going to be ignored/discarded.

Worse than that, they'll make it sound like they're the good guys for doing so by saying they're trying to help the country with spending cuts to help pay off the deficit, so that's why they won't bother to help us

Not at all.

In the big scheme of things the biggest losers in society are the intellectually/sensory and physically disabled. The problems of someone with AS are trivial in comparison and if you are saying you get it as hard as someone who is blind or who has downs syndrome because you struggle with getting a job you have absolutely no idea what these people and their relatives/carers go through.

That 12% figure comes from the NAS's membership. So the correct statement is 12% of people with aspergers or autism who pay for membership of the NAS don't have a job.

I've had periods of long term unemployment in my life, i'm having one now. I see no need to go and make false exajerated claims on a DLA assessment form just so I can get a couple of £££ a week. And I've seen what others have put on their forms to know their exajerating the deficiets of AS. Under scrutiny following the guidelines of the DLA to the letter I fail to see how someone with AS can qualify for DLA purely on the grounds that you presdent with a diagnosis of AS.

Dependency on the state to support you is not the answer and no one wins. The benefit system should not be used as a substitution or compensation for a persons clumsy social communication skills in the processes of getting work.

The old autism bill was proposed by a Tory MP, in its original raw form it was a pretty solid document. It's now been watered down a bit by the previous labour government so sadly its going to be implemented in the manor of a post code lottery (just like our services/or lack off now) Shame ole Cameron has pretty much stated in the past he's anti-inclusion and anti-social model of disability despite having his own disabled child (who died of epilepsy last year)

Anyway Aspie-z

If your able bodied, read and write, understand basic mathamatics and out of work then you better start getting off your arse n building me a new Autobahn heres the cement and spade head to the A14 it could do with some work (joke)

I'm not saying those people have it easy, and depending on which Aspie you're comparing them to (the severity of our symptoms differs very highly person-to-person), they may very well have more problems, but since they're of such a differing nature, that comparison is void anyway.



"I can't get DLA on my case of AS, so no one else should be able to"

As I've told you, the severity AS symptoms differ very highly from person-to-person. You can't generlise that none of these people can get DLA without exaggerating the effects - I do it just fine.

And anyway, DLA isn't based on your medical condition, it's based on your care and mobility needs. It's been like that ever since it was introduced.



Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it's an ideal situation at all, but if the people in charge of making sure people get fair opportunities to work aren't doing their job, they can't just leave us with nothing.

For example, if an autistic person goes into a Job Centre, they will be placed at a lower priority for employment because they're eligible for benefits. The NAS are campaigning to fix this at the moment.

And, as I said before, there's a lot of discrimination going on. Big bosses are much more likely to hire charismatic NTs than stern logical Aspies, that's the sad fact.



Typical Labour, and typical crappy coalition, that's all I can say there.

People are people. The issue I have is that Aspergers as of itself does not have the kind of impact on activities of daily living that is what a DLA assessment is trying to determine. If you have other conditions that meet that criteria or that contribute to the determent of those problems such as being cognatively unable to manage your type 1 diabieties independently for example then the DLA would assess you actually "NEED" support and the benefit is a contribution to such cost.

The claims friends of mine with the condition (some of whom have quite successful careers in professions such as psychology and engineering) have put on their DLA assessments do not reflect the reality of how their AS impacts on them. But in order for them to qualify for the DLA they were advised to exajerate their difficulties and this is where I have a "Problem" with the processes because the person advising them described this as a "formality" to claim DLA. Whereas I tend to view it as a false claim made on a legal document which potentially could be construded as benefit fraud.




I've never attempted to claim DLA. I'd find it quite funny if i did qualify for DLA. I've a meeting with a DEA coming up soon i'll be interested to hear what they will advise me regarding it.

I have however supported numerous people I've supported who had learning disabilities and ASD's to claim DLA and I am familair with the Care rate and the mobility rate. I still maintain such people get a very raw deal out of the system who on the one hand tell them they have the right to live normal life's yet on the otherhand exclude them from the workplace and limit their income to low rate benefits.



Blame the government all you want. The demised labour government did more for the disabled then any government has in 30+ years. Albiet it was still an abysmal amount of reform. Yet the problems that are now being addressed were identified as far back as an investigation from 1976. So it has taken 30+ years for government to addresses the needs of the most vulnerable and ostracised people in our society. We still have people locked up in old victorian institutions who have been institutionalised and are mentally unable to cope or adjust to life in the community. The NHS is hoping to knock those people off soon as the land those institutions exist on is worth a fair bit of £££.

Finally the UK got around to implementing practices which were already established in the scandinavian countries in the 1950's and now the government through "Personalisation" is basically opening up social care for anyone and everyone to have a go at being a service provider. Some might call that privitation through the back door and seeing as the tories are all for it says it all.

For the record, DLA does not actually require a "diagnosis" as such of any given condition (or at least did not) but many decision-making officers will ignore claimants who lack a diagnosis.

A reminder: AS is a spectrum condition. No two of us are exactly alike, and "severity" varies massively.

A postscript: It isn't JUST AS people who will get s**t on with this. The disabled as a whole will cop for it. If an epileptic doesn't throw a seizure IN THE MEDICAL they are like as not to fail. A diabetic rarely "looks" like a diabetic, and thus will "fail". Anyone with an invisible disability is stuffed. Many of those with obvious physical disabilities will be found capable regardless of ability.

You can turn in your neighbours here - but i think the vast majority of investigations do not result in anything, and are largely triggered via anonymous phonecalls from petty vindictive people harbouring a grudge & looking to lash out at someone. I have been 'turned in' myself for apparently possessing £20,000+ from professional gambling and the informant was kind enough to implicate my mother in their insane fantasy. luckily the social saw through it quickly (after demanding access to all my financial records) and so we were spared the pain of a full scale 'gloves off' investigation. I got the impression from the investigator that a lot of their cases were quite similar.

the tv shows sound typical of what is screened over here. I noticed a pattern a few years back,where on several occasions, the goverment were planning a new 'crackdown' & one of these programs would appear a few weeks before the parliamentary bill was due to be read/passed. We are shown several examples of the classic 'cant-walk,but-plays-football-every-weekend' fraudster and similar extreme examples, which are probably a one in a million thing, But your average person on the street will pay lip service to the 'genuine' ones but demand that more needs to be done to clamp down on all these criminals - the result, as macbeth says, is always genuine claimants getting thrown into poverty and increased hardship, whilst the minority of perhaps insignificant dedicated criminals will simply move onto a new scheme.

There was a thread on another board i visit where they are researching the ratio of benefit fraud to overpayment in error & 'upper class' fraud like tax evasion, slum landlords fiddling housing benefit etc. Its a strongly held, long standing conviction on the 'left' that funds lost to benefit fraud pale into significance against these other types.

People seem to forget that many (most even) individuals will WALK THROUGH FIRE to do something they love. Very few low wage office jobs could ever inspire such loyalty and fervent desire, and very few of these Daily Mail reading frothers would go out of their way for their jobs, regardless of what self-righteous BS they spout about "working for a living." "Above and Beyond" is not something that occurs selling cardstock in Slough...not without a bonus at the end of it. IN fact many of the people currently receiving flak for getting HUGE bonuses are the self-same self serving people who have set fire to their own children and sold their own mothers hacking their way to the top in an orgy of "doing that bit extra". They didn't get where they are today by selflessly putting in extra hours for the company. They did it to climb the ladder.