‘These claimants are being discriminated against.’

Getting the PIP: Barbara Harris responds to a recent letters page

I recently returned from a trip to 1652 country. In Brigflatts Meeting house we were told of the steadfastness and convincement of the early Friends. At Lancaster jail we heard graphic detail of the cruel punishments they received, and the courage with which they endured, or sadly did not endure, their fate.

These days punishment is more subtle, as was described by Adam Curle in his Swarthmore Lecture in 1981: ‘But there was violence before, of the sort termed structural violence… This term refers to the political and economic inequalities which are built into the social structure. The violence of the system deprives those at the lower end of the socio-economic scale of what is necessary to fulfilment, both materially and, since they are made to feel inferior and insecure, psychologically.’

My disabled family member has been unable to work since 2007 and claimed Disability Living Allowance until this was changed in 2016 to the Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The suffering began immediately with his claim being denied by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Simultaneously, other benefits ceased. Months elapsed before the case came to tribunal and his benefits were restored with back pay. But there is no compensation for the worry and unnecessary hardship the family endured.

Last year the cycle began again with a DWP interview, after which the PIP was again stopped, as was the linked Carer’s Allowance. Despite a Mandatory Reconsideration we were again refused and joined the long queue of refused claimants for yet another tribunal. As yet, we have no date.

The PIP procedure is based on a false premise, namely that it is possible to judge a disability case by looking only at the actions the claimant is capable of managing. The claimant’s state of mind and body appears to be ignored, as are, in our experience, consultant’s letters. In a letter from the DWP to our MP, a DWP complaints resolution manager stated that ‘Entitlement to PIP is not dependant on the medical diagnosis of a condition but on how that condition affects a person’s ability to walk and manage their own self-care on a daily basis.’

There are fifteen questions to be answered on the form, with further discussion at a PIP interview. There is, however, no specific question about mental acuity/sleepiness/chronic fatigue and so claimants/patients are prevented from fully describing drug-induced sleepiness or chronic fatigue experienced as in cases of MS, ME, Parkinson’s, epilepsy or Motor Neurone Disease. No question means no point score.

There is no question about pain, as with arthritis, so that too goes unreported and unscored. These claimants are being discriminated against, and prevented from fully reporting how their disability affects their lives. Structural violence!

I would not advocate writing to our MPs: they are merely serving as postmasters, we have learned. But I am hoping that Quakers the length and breadth of the country might treat this matter as a concern and take it through the concern process.

The shocking statistic is that seventy-three per cent of refused PIP claimants have their benefits restored at tribunal. Surely this indicates a flawed process. Quakers can do this – speak truth to power and bring this unjust process to an end.

---

Comments

With careful wording it is possible to represent the effects of pain, sleepiness, forgetfulness etc on the PIP form e.g. about needing supervision while cooking in case of sleepiness or forgetfulness which would make it unsafe. However, many people do not know to do this and may try to present themselves at interview in a positive light. Do consult Citizens Advice or another welfare agency for help if you have to complete these forms and/or make an appeal.

By doreen.osborne@outlook.com on 23rd May 2019 - 16:16

---

Please login to add a comment