Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

RNIB Scotland director: Unnecessary and cruel tests must be halted… There has to be a better way

James Adams
James Adams

FOR many disabled people, the Personal Independence Payment could hardly be more important.

It helps support the everyday quality of life for people living with disabilities and the PIP assessment should be expert and straightforward.

That is why we are so concerned that blind and partially sighted people who have gone through the PIP application and assessment process have found it a distressing and emotionally draining experience.

Common problems include a lack of understanding by assessors of sight loss; assessments which make applicants feel as if they are not trusted; and the worry that if they aren’t trusted they will have vital support withdrawn.

Applicants can appeal the decision if their support is withdrawn. However the appeals process can take months, leaving them without support and compounding stress.

Research by the Department for Work and Pensions found that 72% of appeals were successful.

This means that in 72% of such cases, the applicant took a financial and emotional hit, unnecessarily, as they were not assessed adequately the first time round.

RNIB Scotland wants to see assessments used only in cases where more information can usefully be gained, for assessors to receive more training on different sight conditions, and for the application process to be reviewed so that applicants are asked questions that are relevant to them.

In the case of sight loss, it is rare that an assessment will be able to tell you more than a doctor’s diagnosis or a certificate of registration of visual impairment.

The majority of sight conditions will not improve.

So it would only be appropriate to assess someone with the view of potentially giving them more support rather than removing support.

To make the system both more cost effective and less stressful for applicants, we’re asking the Government to rethink the PIP application process and introduce automatic entitlement to benefits when the assessed condition is not going to improve.

Until these changes are made, people will continue to go through an often distressing process to get the necessary support.