PIP-AR1 - 3 MORE QUESTIONS: communication activities/point challenges/evidence

@ Gordon thanks for all the input

2 points i need to pick up on:

A) To clairfy how to tackle Q9 Talking, listening and understanding (Activity 7) and comms support definitions:
In BNW pip guide:
1. Top of page 61 states:
Communication support” means support from a person trained or experienced in communicating with people with specific communication needs, including interpreting verbal information into a non-verbal form and vice versa.
2. Top of page 62 then further states:
Guidance issued by the DWP suggests that communication support can include people like professional signers, but it can also include: ‘someone directly experienced in communicating with the claimant themselves (for example, a family member)’.
3. If i then apply the 'needs doesn't get' rule - mid p63:
4 Should you have help from another person?
Help includes help you need but don’t get.

Does 2 and 3 above enable me to simply state 'needs comms support' and simply add family members for the sandwich bar example you indicated would be problematic ?
You seem to argue that the issue of 'can't get / why i don't have' comms support needs explaination but the 3 clauses above seems to place it in the same catagory as all 'aid' types in all activities, being that it's flexible who the help is from and it can be hypothetical not actual ? Am i right this applies to comms support in this activity ?

Where you state "do not lose track of this (Reading Activity 8) being primarily a physical test, it is easy for "understanding" to become a matter of opinion"
Descriptor 8a,b and e: i would argue are all 'primarily a physical test'
Descriptors 8c & 8d both state "Needs prompting to be able to read or understand complex /basc written information"
Doesn't the use of the term 'prompting' and 'understand' indicate a primarily cognitive emphasis not a primarily physical emphasis ?
There is no BnW definition given for 'understand' in this activity.
The upper tribunal case CPIP/1653/2019 itemised instead only indicates the judge decreed:
‘Prompting’ will seldom be relevant because: “Explaining” what a piece of basic written information is, so that the person does not need to read it, is not prompting them to read it.'
But 'prompting them to read' very much applies to conditions with low motivation like depressive illnesess as well as distracted congnitve conditions like psychosis and dyslexia, where re-reading and misunderstanding occur as a matter of course- so i'm confused why 'prompting to read' is de-prioritised to the point the guide sides with the tribunal in case CPIP/1653/2019 and suggests bc and 8d count less, to the point of being irrelevant.
What do i run with here ? Is the assessor legally oblidged to consider the context of 'needs prompting to read/and understand for the above type conditions i itemise with equal measure as 'physical ability to read' or are you saying no, 'needs prompting to read' is currently legally all but irrelevant ?
I note in the descriptors 8c and 8d all 'requirment words' hold equal place to those in 8b and 8e - there's no indication that 8c and 8d are some how less relevant other than the sited tribunal case CPIP/1653/2019. So how dominant is this tribunal finding over the issue ?

Cheers again. Appreciated.
sp

thanks again - @Gordon

Regarding you reply above for activity 8 : Reading: Just to ask- where you say "you have mentioned a number of conditions which affect your ability to understand what you are reading but do not lose track of what the definitions are for the material you are being asked to read."-

I'm confused about this sentence. If there is no legal definition of 'understand' then it's possible to 'lose track' and 'fail to gain understanding'' in the context of complex sentences because one implies the other. This is because dyselxia and depression can cause a failure to engage with or leave gaps in the act of reading which loses track AND understanding. I may understand the phrase 'Do Not' but if i miss out or miss read or miss procoess the next part of the sentence then i will lose track and understanding. Further, Psychosis can read into texts messages & meanings that may not be in the objective definition. For example paranoia may see the timing of a sign's arrival as significant for reasons other than what is actually written and suggest messages and meaningswhich don't mean what it says. For example, psychotic depression may see the conventional sign of danger of death if you cross a rail track as an invitiation or incitement to suicide because of the timing if it's arrival externally contrasted with the internal thinking occuring.
Do these type of examples count, if applied to the starting point you suggest being that it must be 'neccessary to read' in the first place you seem to be saying is also required ?
OR
Are you saying that this activity is only specifically about physical capactiy where 'understanding'' is inhibitied or obstructed only by physical incapactiy or restrcition alone and if so, is this unequivocal and no mental capactiy issue can apply at all ?
The reason this keeps coming up is because the PIP guide states the definition of 'prompting' as a descriptor to be specifically universal for activities on p29 and it's the one i've applied throw out my answers. Throw in no defintion for 'understand' and i'm left very unsure beyond what you tell me here in this post what to put in the answer.... The descriptors that apply don't reasonably infer this is all about physical capacity alone, in fact as previously ,mentioned they seem to imply both which is contrary to what you said above ie: "Activity 8 was intended to cover claimants with a sight problem, starting with total blindness and then working back to those who have restricted sight." which is stated in the past tense "was intended" further suggesting no longer ..... ? ???

Also

Is there any chance you or someone can cast an eye back over the 1st post / original question - A) Q9 Talking, listening and understanding (Activity 7) and let me know if the conclusions are correct ?

thanks for all your input on these 2 activities because im not finding it easy to asssess if my conditions apply and if so how to state it correctly..... sorry im being a bit challenging but it just reflects my lack of clarity .....

cheers again
sp

Hi

My answer would be yes i can understand to basic most of the time but:
1. No. For complex - if i am psychotic or suffering from exacerbated dyslexia or depression or both toether or psychotic depression because of the previous symptoms stated - being that my mind will neglect to read the text as a logically flowing chain of words and will also skip parts + psychosis will cause my projections to impose on the order of the words a specific meaning.
2. No for basic where: psycosis will cause my projections to impose on single words a different specific meaning. Where Exit in a toilet could mean something in a psycotic 'whole world' - a state where everything has a different meaning, means that it doesn't mean Exit the toilet - it means something related to the psychotic whole world i am experiencing so it might mean 'Take a train'.

So applying the PIP guides advice re: 'reliably' - i see safety and quality and repeatidly issues that could require prompting but you seem to be saying NO- reliably and prompting and what understanding means dont apply - what matters is that i seem to recognise 'exit' means 'exit' wether my mind thinks it means catch a train, take your life, get out of town or this way out ? It's all the same theme which is i recognise 'exit'.

Are we at a stale mate on this point because i'm no less confused and is there any chance of some reflection of the other original question - A) Q9 Talking, listening and understanding (Activity 7) and let me know if the conclusions are correct ?

thanks again
sp