social contact descriptor and support group

The interpretation from the WCA Internal Review (October 2009) for the social contact descriptor:-

Coping with Social Situations

The primary function of this activity is identifying functional capability in terms of social contact, making inclusion of the ability to visit new places inappropriate. Limitation in the ability to get around is identified elsewhere.

Temporality is not the best measure of an individual’s capability in social situations. Scale is important, for example an individual may cope with contact with one or two individuals, but not a room full of people. However, familiarity provides a more appropriate measure in relation to the work place. The individual’s ability to engage in social contact is the crucial ability. An individual may be unable to engage in any social contact at all.

For these individuals, contact even with those that are familiar is precluded. Individuals able to engage with those that are familiar present a lesser degree of disability, and if an individual is able to engage in contact with unfamiliar individuals, this does not present a limitation for work purposes. This distinction suggests that the disability is either pervasive, precluding all social engagement, or presents little hindrance.

Read into this what you will?

Crazydiamond wrote:

The interpretation from the WCA Internal Review (October 2009) for the social contact descriptor:-

Coping with Social Situations

The primary function of this activity is identifying functional capability in terms of social contact, making inclusion of the ability to visit new places inappropriate. Limitation in the ability to get around is identified elsewhere.

Temporality is not the best measure of an individual’s capability in social situations. Scale is important, for example an individual may cope with contact with one or two individuals, but not a room full of people. However, familiarity provides a more appropriate measure in relation to the work place. The individual’s ability to engage in social contact is the crucial ability. An individual may be unable to engage in any social contact at all.

For these individuals, contact even with those that are familiar is precluded. Individuals able to engage with those that are familiar present a lesser degree of disability, and if an individual is able to engage in contact with unfamiliar individuals, this does not present a limitation for work purposes. This distinction suggests that the disability is either pervasive, precluding all social engagement, or presents little hindrance.

Read into this what you will?

Its not too hard to work out the first line of the last paragraph sets out what I have been saying, that this question is based on the needs of IMo 30% of people at the end of the autistic spectrum ... I can see that some people might at times get points for this from a dm not reading it correct but if we ever wanted proof they wanted to make the test much harder this question is a very good example

Depressing reading, that internal review

However, on the positive side, it could be argued that coping and engaging have meaning, just being there in the room is one thing, but engaging with others in a way that is sufficiently functional is another. What is 'coping' with contact ? if oen cannot relate to others or suffer overwhelming anxiety then presumably you get awarded the descriptor.

The sheer height of this particular bar will make the assessors sceptical of anyone claiming this level of disability, they may see verification from GPs or others

On its face, if you get a\ hospital appointment with an unfamiliar consultant, or see a different GP at your practice, you would not be awarded this descriptor

If I forget my own scepticism for a moment and imagine myself to be a Disability Analyst I can see what is meant by the person coping with familiar others in the workplace, even the very anxious could eventually adapt to a small circle, but that familiarity will not be assured, what about visitors to the workplace, and the persons response to social contact when under greater work pressure ? Temporary staff, callers to the office or warehouse etc, what about the travelling to weork in public transport, there is a big list of possibles to trip up the socvially very an xious or those who have problems relating to others

I have the impression that not being able to contend with a roomful of people is intended to be disregarded in this descriptor ? But the fact is few jobs are working with one or two others, unless its a shop and that will inbvolve constant contact with unfamiliar people

Its a mess, I think a deliberately worded one, intended to make it virtually impossible to get

The trouble with the WCA Internal Review is it written in such a way that I doubt very much that even the most well-informed observer will have any real understanding what it is actually all about?

Although I wouldn't necessarily put myself into the "well-informed observer" bracket, it is so full of ambiguous whys and wherefores I'm beginning to wonder if the DWP really have any idea of what has been written in the document, or perhaps that was the intention?

some where on the NAT website is information on this question, they where the ones who I think fought hard for this question to be in the esa, the problem is like any charity or group fighting there corner (if thats the case) by winning they have closed the door to people who need the bar a little lower, having seen people who will get esa based on this one question there is no doubt its right for them, and charities can be pleased at a job well done if they stick to "always" and at an appeal the DWP stance is up held more people than helped will lose out IMO of course