I belong to a secret society of drinkers. It is an elite club and one I have belonged to since I had my children. Whilst this opening statement sounds like a declaration or admission you would expect to hear from a frazzled worn out mother at an AA meeting it is more a desperate cry for change and greater awareness – for ours is a group that use alcohol (or chocolate or any other comfort food really) as a crutch to help us through the filling in of a form. Yes, a single form.
It is in reaching for a pen and the thick document to begin the process of completing this application form that the urge becomes overwhelming. Yes, I am a social drinker. However, in my usual day to day life I don’t rely on substances, food or alcohol to help me through the day.
However the ritual which is the filling in of the Disability Living Allowance forms for my sons, both of whom are profoundly deaf, has me reaching for a glass of white wine and a box of tissues.
Whilst my husband braces himself for the torrent of emotions he knows come as standard on these occasions. It is a scenario which is mirrored in many other homes as parents navigate the numerous pages in a bid to adequately describe their child, for I am not alone in feeling this need for something to fortify me through the hours it will take me fill in every section and box.
Disability Living Allowance forms are the way in which adults with disabilities and parents of children with disabilities apply for a contribution from the government which is for ‘the extra costs of severely disabled people’. This may to people observing from the outside to be a way of getting additional benefits for a slush fund to finance fancy extras. In reality there are a slew of hidden costs, extra petrol, additional equipment and unexpected costs associated to hospital stays and appointments which add to a monthly budget quickly.
Being given this contribution makes a whole world of difference to some families where the parents need to make difficult decisions to cut working hours, thereby reducing their income, to accommodate the extra care their children need and the hours spent in appointments or therapy/rehabilitation sessions. Amounts of time, hours and hours, which mean you either require a very understanding boss or a day which holds more than the standard 24 hours – and even Jack Bauer never found one of those! The difference this contribution can make for some families is a matter of survival as they juggle all the elements of their daily life.
The forms cover such a wide range of disabilities that it can be difficult to find a way to use the sections given to describe the challenges your child faces in aspects of their daily living and mobility. It is frustrating to feel that whoever created the form must never have met a deaf child or has no understanding of the complexities deafness can have in the care of the child. I am sure that many other parents of children with different disabilities must also share these experiences in the way in which the form is set out – it is not only awkward for us. There inevitably needs to be subsets added into the form, in ink, where we scrawl a different set of circumstances which affect our children’s needs as well as the set printed onto the form originally. Throughout there are phrases you find yourself using repetitively to the point that they run through your subconscious like a mantra as you try and switch off even after the form is complete.
It is, however, the actual need to fill in the form and lay bare the worst of your days, the level of your child’s needs and just how difficult life is for them and consequently also for you as their parent that provides the worst pain of this process. The detailing of how far removed your child’s abilities, independence and day to day life is from the life most children and young people live is the equivalent of being faced with a billboard covered in six foot high letters placed outside your front window where you cannot ignore its existence.
To move forward on a daily basis in a way which promotes the achievement of your child’s potential you find as a parent that you cannot focus on the difficulties or how hard life is for them and those supporting them. You instead find the positive, take each day as new promise and hope that they will have a good day where a skill will be mastered or an obstacle overcome. These forms push aside all of this and take you back face to face with what you and your child fight against every day – forcing you to meet it head on to prove the level of care necessary to qualify for the support many families so desperately need.
So often though if the forms do not plumb the full depths of how difficult some children find life, and even sometimes when it is, the form is returned as not qualifying. I have heard many parents comment on hearing this negative response that ‘if only they had them for 24 hours’. The response perceived as dismissing all the care the parent provides for their child on a daily basis and seemingly counting as insignificant the appointments, pre planning, adjustments, consideration, liaison with professionals, hours of worry and anxiety that parent has gone through with their child. For some this judgement is absolute and they take it as final. For others, those advised that this is an inaccurate response, they go on to beg for re-consideration – a process many find humiliating.
I appreciate the need for weeding out those who would make false or exaggerated applications however in completing the countless pages of the forms to prove that your child has needs which are ‘substantially more than a non-disabled child of the same age’ it goes against all the natural parental instincts of looking at what your child can do rather than what they cannot. As a parent you praise their tiniest gurgle, sound, facial expression or attempt at moving from the moment they arrive into this world and are placed in your arms. Further, as a parent of a child with difficulties that is where you see the rewards and gain motivation for continued momentum. It is there in all those additional small steps of success which our children go through on their way to the big ones which most children hurtle through. To pull apart the achievements and success to reveal the scaffolding you put in place as a parent to enable them to happen takes away some of the illusion, ruins the magic of those moments.
I guess what I am asking for in sharing this story, and my associated need for a nice glass of chardonnay, is a reprieve. An overhaul of a system which would allow us parents to preserve that illusion and believe in the magic that each of our children’s small achievements bring – for that is our fuel, the source of our drive and often the very thing which helps us to continue day in day out. A revision to this existing process, which would no longer require repeated applications pulling apart of our children’s abilities to justify their need for this contribution. For after the form is completed, sent off and has landed on someone’s desk for their removed and impersonal consideration, the parent of the child will be waking up each morning- on duty as ever and ready to face the day’s challenges and worries – needing to believe in and draw strength from the positives of what their child can do and can achieve.
Tamsin Coates trained and worked as a Speech and Language Therapist for over 10 years. Her training came in useful when she had two sons who are profoundly deaf. She now juggles being a mum to three lively children, writing (buy her book Meanwhile I Keep Dancing here) running the Wirral Deaf Children’s Society (with her friend Lisa) and raising awareness regarding deaf issues wherever she can.
The Limping Chicken’s supporters provide: sign language interpreting and communications support (Deaf Umbrella), online BSL video interpreting (SignVideo), captioning and speech-to-text services (121 Captions), online BSL learning and teaching materials (Signworld), theatre captioning (STAGETEXT), Remote Captioning (Bee Communications), visual theatre with BSL (Krazy Kat) , healthcare support for Deaf people (SignHealth), theatre from a Deaf perspective (Deafinitely Theatre ), specialist lipspeaking support (Lipspeaker UK), Deaf television programmes online (SDHH), language and learning (Sign Solutions), BSL interpreting and communication services (Lexicon Signstream), sign language and Red Dot online video interpreting (Action Deafness Communications) education for Deaf children (Hamilton Lodge School in Brighton), and legal advice for Deaf people (RAD Deaf Law Centre).
Andy. Not him, me.
August 19, 2013
I have campaigned for years about the unfairness of DLA. I was one of the first people to apply after the Halliday judgement and the problem was, hardly anyone knew how to do it. We were given no guidance whatsoever as to what was required and my first application was rejected out of hand.
I went to my local deaf association in Plymouth and after a long wait I was assigned an advisor who put the process in motion. At that time it was considered necessary to quote chapter and verse of the relevant judgement and so the file of papers rapidly grew to an inch thick.
Disaster struck. The advisor suddenly left and went elsewhere. It seems there was some kind of disagreement and she upped and went, leaving all the DLA people high and dry.
As it happened I was able to get advice from the County Council advisors and as a result of that I worked with a young legal student from the CAB to put my application together. The total number of hours it took to assemble all this was 4.5, working together.
The application was refused.
Painstakingly we found out how to appeal and assembled another lot of documents. I booked a STTR operator (there’s only one in Cornwall) and turned up at the Tribunal in my best whistle and toot. I felt that the Tribunal were doing their best to raise objections to my having DLA. I didn’t have any real difficulty in understanding them but some of the things they said were so off the wall I thought I had misunderstood.
Anyway, I won! It had taken 14 months and involved no less than three organisations and seven different advisors but I got Middle Rate Care DLA. I had also applied for Lower Rate Mobility on the basis that I have no usable hearing and need help with lipreading the public. However this was not accepted. I then discovered that you can’t appeal just one part of the decision, it has to be the whole thing or none at all. So I decided to accept the decision because by that time I was desperately short of money. In fact I was doing my washing in the bath because I didn’t have enough money for a new washing machine, the old one having turned up its toes in the middle of all this!
The result of all this is that I became very angry at the way so many people were being denied a benefit that was specifically designed to help them. It’s like snatching a meal away from a hungry person. Just a mean trick. “Of course you can claim this benefit, we’re just going to make it nearly impossible for you”.
I have spent well over a decade now explaining to people on as many forums as possible how the DLA “trick” works and how to overcome it. A social worker explained to me how it is done and I passed on the information to as many people as possible. I know that plenty of people have been encouraged to apply for DLA as a result of that and many have succeeded. This is because they said all the right things, gave all the right answers necessary to trigger a favourable decision.
So, now that DLA is being scrapped everyone is focussed on making sure that its replacement, PIP is fairly assessed. There are many articles in the Press about supposed failing and shortcomings in the system. ATOS in particular has been censured for the poor way in which the assessments are being carried out. It’s up to us as deaf people to keep up the pressure for fair treatment. Deafness isn’t something that goes away miraculously and it can safely be assumed that all deaf people face very similar problems.
I just don’t understand why they make such a production out of it. Possibly it is to do with the Civil Service. They have offices all over the country dealing with DLA and its appeals and Tribunals. Scrap all that and the chances are that Civil Servants will be out of a job. That’s why I think it is in their interests to make benefits as hard to get as possible. The resulting ballyhoo keeps them all in lucrative work for life while we struggle.
Up the revolution!
Silent night (and day)
August 20, 2013
Tamsin Coates hits the nail on the head when she mentions ” the need for weeding out those who would make false or exaggerated applications”. She refers to DLA as a “contribution from the government” but it’s fundamentally a contribution from the taxpayer. I think the taxpayer is fed up with reading about benefit fraud. After all, it’s the taxpayer – the man in the street – who’s being defrauded.
A good example came to light recently when the members of a Facebook group submitted posts comparing tips on how to trick the DLA assessors into thinking you’re deafer than you are. And (by the way) these posts were unprotected and so visible to anyone who cared to look, including civil servants.
It’s fraudsters that are giving benefit claimants a bad name. That’s why the assessment process is so probing and arduous.
I feel sure the PIP regime which is replacing DLA will be just as tough. But I hope it’s handled more sensitively. For example, it would be wonderful if the assessors showed a bit more deaf awareness. At least I understand ATOS’s role is being reviewed, which is a promising sign.
Emma - hörselresan
August 27, 2013
This seems to be an international issue. My son, now nearly two years old, was diagnosed with a severe hearing loss when he was two months old. He got hearing aids when he was four months and then a CI at just over 12 months old.
The process to apply for DLA in Sweden seems much simpler BUT the decisions made by the particular authority are extremely arbitrary. The same diagnosis and amount of time spent with habilitation, meetings, hospital visits etc etc can be judged extremely differently depending on where you live and which person gets assigned to which case.
We were eventually granted 1/4 of the full amount after a lot of fighting. We’ve now taken the case to the first level of the administrative court system to have that decision changed, citing arbitrariness in the desicion making process as one of the reasons.