Does Incontinence aids effect the ESA descriptors

page 84 and 85 might answer your questions

www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-handbook.pdf

Doris

Even if your interpretation is correct, that does not mean that you cannot still argue your case for points.

The real difficulty is that there is no specific case law relating to the new ESA criteria, and won't be for at least a year. You can often argue that case law from other benefits or older criteria is still relevant, but the soiling of clothing is new and to my mind invalidates any previous case law with regard to the use of pads.

Gordon

Hi Doris

It does sound as if the meaning is as you suggest. It appears that the thinking around incontinence and ability to work was heavily influenced by considerations of dignity and social embarrassment, so it may be that if the incontince can be sucessfully managed with pads then the social issues are avoided, and one is assumed able to work (in that respect at least).

regards
Rainbowlight

originaldave wrote:

page 84 and 85 might answer your questions

www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wca-handbook.pdf

This is what I referring to ( p 86 )

Quote "The descriptors do dot refer to minor degrees of leakage that could be managed by the use of pads and not necessitate a full change of clothing. If a person is not using pads, they should be considered as if using pads as these are a widely available aid."

and yes they did spell not as dot !

I understand that as if you fully void every day, as long as the pads work you dont meet the descriptors and therefore will fail the WCA ?

Or have my pills fogged my brain again