Teenage boy with no arms and legs told to 'prove' his disability by DWP

[citizenB]

I could not believe I was reading this...

 

A teenage quadruple amputee has stopped receiving disability payments from the Government and has been told he must attend a face-to-face meeting to prove he is unable to work, his parents have said.

 

Edward Bright lost his arms and legs to meningitis, aged seven, and his family have since claimed £388-a-month Disability Living Allowance on his behalf.

 

When Edward turned 16 last month, he had to claim again for the Personal Independence Payment, which has replaced DLA.

 

But he received a letter back ordering him to attend a face-to-face meeting or risk losing his benefits.

 

And despite being told Edward would get interim payments while being assessed, his mother, Clare, 46, claims no money has gone into her son’s account since January.

 

Full story : - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/12162363/Teenage-boy-with-no-arms-and-legs-told-to-prove-his-disability-by-Department-for-Work-and-Pensions.html

 

[citizenB]

More

 

A teenager whose arms and legs were amputated after he nearly died from meningitis was ordered to attend a meeting in person or risk losing his disability benefits, his parents have said.

 

Edward Bright, who uses a wheelchair, was told he would have to make a new claim for the Personal Independence Payment benefit after his 16th birthday last month, The Daily Mirror reported.

 

After his family, who live in Derbyshire, filled in a form, they were sent a letter saying Edward had to attend a face-to-face meeting.

 

His father Steve Bright, 47, said: “It’s* absolutely disgusting. He’s a quad amputee for God’s sake.

 

“It isn’t like he’s going to get better. He isn’t going to suddenly grow new arms and legs. We were shocked to be asked to attend the meeting.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/teenage-quadruple-amputee-told-to-prove-he-is-disabled-to-keep-benefits-a6880526.html

[citizenB]

 

 

The family of a teenager who lost both arms and legs to meningitis as a child have told how they were left "horrified and disgusted" when he was asked to attend an assessment for his disability benefit to continue.

 

Edward Bright became a quadruple amputee after developing meningitis-related septicaemia as a seven-year-old, and before recently turning 16, the GCSE student received a £388-a-month Disability Living Allowance (DLA), his family told the Daily Mirror.

 

 

 

But after his 16th birthday in January he received a letter instructing him to attend a face-to-face meeting with an assessor in order to claim the Personal Independence Payment (PIP), successor to the DLA, the newspaper reports.

 

Despite his condition being known to benefits staff the teenager was told to travel from his home in Derbyshire to an assessment centre. When his family complained managers allegedly backtracked and arranged for a home assessment instead.

 

Edward's mother, Clare, told the newspaper:

 

" We assumed his case would be as exceptional given the fact he has had his legs and arms amputated. We were horrified and disgusted to get the letter saying he needed an assessment.

 

They wanted him to go to Derby and even gave instructions on how to walk to the office from the station. It's a shambles."

 

– Clare Bright, mother

 

http://www.itv.com/news/central/2016-02-18/boy-with-no-arms-or-legs-told-he-must-prove-he-is-disabled-to-keep-benefits/

 

 

It is disgraceful is what it is !!

[citizenB]

 

Since the family's case featured in the Daily Mirror, the Department of Work and Pensions has admitted the assessment is unnecessary.

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-35610958

 

 

The DWP claim that it is an "invitation" - how can this be seen as such when they then advise that if you don't attend your benefits will be withdrawn !

[silverfox1961]

When I first saw this, I thought it was a wind up but the more I read, the further my jaw dropped.

 

Just goes to show that the forms filled in are not read. having looked at the pictures of the poor lad, prosthetics would be of no use to him anyway so he wouldn't be able to walk anywhere

[Nystagmite]

But how is that any different to the rest of us? You have to remember it depends on how the forms are filled in and it's not based on the conditions he has.

[citizenB]

But how is that any different to the rest of us? You have to remember it depends on how the forms are filled in and it's not based on the conditions he has.

 

I think the point being made by the articles, is, that the DWP really don't need any "proof" that this lad is indeed disabled. Also that they were already aware that he was a quadruped so to not offer the home visit in the first place was a bit stupid.

 

Similar to others where the DWP have the information in front of them - knowing a person is using a wheelchair or other walking aid and then sending them to places where there is no lift access ?

 

There are many disabilities that are not visible and so those would need face to face assessments - whether at home or at a centre.

[mikeymack2002]

I very much agree with the above statement from CB. There to are issues with the amount of 'care' you need/receive, as does making difficult journeys on your own. Travelling to a new place and or town is also one of the descriptors'. If the building you have to visit for the interview has a lift use it, if not then report to reception and ask the examiner to come to the ground floor. This is a reasonable request and if they refuse this can then be used on appeal.

 

 

Discrimination can take form in many ways. Some as simple as a separate toilet for disabled persons. Chairs that have arms, not those that the DWP provide in front of the desk. But at the other end of the room. In this case you ask the examiner to replace the chair with the one with the arms. Again if they refuse note it and use it in the appeal process. there are many different and insignificant ways you can cause serious issues for a disabled person. You just have to look at life from OUR eyes...

[reallymadwoman]

ATOS have effectively admitted to me, in writing, that all assessments are initially booked via their automatic system which simply allocates the first available appointment at any centre within their opinon of a reasonable travel distance. There is also evidence that they are sending appointments to all claimants.

 

DWP have refused to even investigate whether either of the above are happening since, in their opinion, it's solely a matter for ATOS.

 

It does beg the question that if it's not even going to be read, why bother asking about special requirements on the form? Why not simply add to the appointment letter to contact them if you have any special requirements?

 

As to asking people to attend assessments unnecessarily, this is something that is built into the system. The contracts specify a minimum percentage of people who must be assessed face-to-face, so either the people who drew up the terms are psychic or some people who shouldn't need a face to face are going to be forced to have one.

[tommy456]

The Government and it's minions AKA Atos / Maximus don't care about the welfare of claimant's and i would use the word assessment loosely to describe this WCA interview /interrogation under duress yes but a fair and valid assessment certainly not

 

You have to wonder if this isn't against our human rights and why it isn't

[Sparks_]

Why didnt they just turn up at the assessment center...end of story then? We all have to fill in the forms...the best we can, then some have to go for a F2F, if they repeatedly made him go year on year for a F2F then yes I would be upset and angry but for 1 its something all disabled have to have at sometime

[tommy456]

But the point being made here is that without assistance by others the claimant would not be able to attend their interrogation would they, ? So why do this uncaring sad excuse of a government and it's overpaid [edited] insist on expecting those are clearly unable to get to their interrogation centres to do exactly that or risk loosing their benefits? how is this even considered to be reasonable? the law /rules need to change government needs to be held to account on this (yes ids i'm talking to you )

Edited February 22, 2016 by honeybee13
Pejorative term removed.