Why are ADHD benefits in the firing line?

[FunStork]

I've been seeing this a lot recently.

Feels like the media is very much against ADHD benefits claims.

Why is that the one that seems to be getting all the focus?

Another one from BBC Verify tonight:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c24ym9yd8p6o

Is this an orchestrated campaign?

Yes, we had questionnaires for school / parents / child. But that’s not « proof », and more importantly it is very subjective. For ex: does your child struggles with homework - many children do, ADHD or not. Is he anxious - never/occasionally/often/all the time: I might have answered ‘occasionally’ because it is only a few times a day but another parent might say ‘all the time’ because it’s every day.

Nothing else, just made the appt and had a call booked 2 weeks later.

I know that childhood cancer is rising and no one knows why. Cancer treatment is made for adult bodies, not child bodies and can cause all kinds of complications which means children can end up needing DLA for years after cancer treatment if they survive, sometimes for much longer than that.

It sounds like your friend/relative doesnt meet the criteria without lying. Its a shame fraud exists.

But you do also believe the criteria are wrong as well, which i suppose it what i am getting at.

Every system has fraud and we can do what we can to prevent fraud and its immoral to be fraudulent

But a lot of people also disagree with some of the fundamental ideas behind pip but sort of muddle the two together.

Many feel that being too psychologically overwhelmed to make any journey, or only being able to make a familiar journey with support (which is defined as frequent /continous) - shouldnt be enough to be eligible for higher rate mobility.

But removing this would then exclude people with very obvious learning disabilities that you may well recognise as needing support to be mobile.

Its a tricky balance which is why need rather than condition has been the deciding factor to date.

But is all up for change im sure.

That is an outdated website. Only children get DLA now, 16+ get PIP.

When it comes through, this image shows how a child can be eligible for high rate mobility part of DLA through the severe mentally impaired route. It is by far from easy.

Yes, Completely agree. And unlike what the the poster upthread wants to believe, most "specialist consultant interventions will be years long waits for assessment or the private clinics which are deeply problematic. There are no interventions offered other than medication even though CBT has a robust evidence based. So people applying for PIP may well not have a diagnosis or a deeply suspect one, may only had had medicine offered as an intervention, and may be unaware of alternative ways to cope.

@Myskyscolourlots of people struggle with standardised questionaries that are closed ended (defined answers rather than open narrative) and believe them to be subjective. They are actually considered to be objective and able to be subject to statistical analysis regardless of whether you might struggle to answer one way or another. The objectivity is compounded by questionnaires completed by parents, child and school. Maybe you thought all was well but the school and child questionnaires aligned. This is all scored prior to the diagnostic interview.

Kindly I think that you may be struggling with legitimate diagnosis and therefore demanding ‘proof’. This is about supporting your child. Untreated ADHD can have catastrophic life long effects. But it is treatable and early diagnosis and treatment are effective.

@Kirbert2 That is an outdated website. Only children get DLA now, 16+ get PIP.

Thanks for the update. The criteria for higher rate mobility doesn't change regardless of whether it's DLA or PIP, so my points still stand.

The criteria for high rate mobility DLA under SMI is incredibly strict. You have to meet all criteria's for SMI, even if a child meets every criteria but one then they aren't eligible.

As it has been pointed out numerous times, but those posters who consistently say that you need no proof, or the Doctors, and Consultants just write up whatever a patient says, seem to think they know best!

Don’t get me wrong, I completely accept my son’s ADHD (and autism) diagnosis. We paid for it privately as we didn’t wanted to wait for months, so definitely not a case of struggling with accepting it.

However, I was shocked at the difference between the two diagnosis. For autism, DS spent two long sessions with a psychiatrist + a separate session with parents, where we were asked detailed questions, examples etc. He was 10yo at the time.

Now at 12yo, it was apparently fine for me to be there during the assessment and even to be the one answering most questions. And again, we were not asked about details, how exactly is x challenging, what happens
during a typical homework session, etc, just: do you struggle with homework?

My point is: whilst I’m convinced that DS has ADHD, I found that it would have been very easy to get a diagnosis for a child with no special needs. And that’s not the case with ASD assessment - maybe why people are not as doubtful as with ADHD.

They use the ASC diagnosis to inform the AdHD diagnosis and vice versa.

That isn’t what the NHS ADHD taskforce is saying. In 2013 changes were made because women and girls were shut out of the diagnosis process and we now known ADHD presents differently in females. Surprise surprise some don’t like it now women that have been historically shut out are coming forward. Medical misogyny yet again.