Overlapping issues from Parts 1 & 2 of new ESA50

Bearing in mind the changes to the ESA50 from 28/1/2013, is it wiser to omit all reference to physical disability from Part 2 of the form that deals with “mental, cognitive and intellectual functions” rather than confuse an issue with information that will not be taken into account?

How should claimants deal with “mental, cognitive and intellectual functions” that are impaired as a result of a physical neurological disorder (e.g. Parkinson’s Disease) or neurological damage (e.g. from a stroke) and overlap with answers to Part 1 questions?

MariW wrote: Bearing in mind the changes to the ESA50 from 28/1/2013, is it wiser to omit all reference to physical disability from Part 2 of the form that deals with “mental, cognitive and intellectual functions” rather than confuse an issue with information that will not be taken into account?

How should claimants deal with “mental, cognitive and intellectual functions” that are impaired as a result of a physical neurological disorder (e.g. Parkinson’s Disease) or neurological damage (e.g. from a stroke) and overlap with answers to Part 1 questions?

Hi MW,

In my personal opinion, I would still list all "Mental" limitations, and/or "Physical" limitations.

However, as you know, there is no guarantee that that they will now be taken as relevant by The ATOS HCP, and/or The DWP DM.

You should present your case as best you can, let them pick the bones out of it.

Gordon has been discussing this issue, here :

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/forum?view=top...id=10&id=96867#98731

bro58

Thank you bro58- and thanks to Gordon and MSCarer for their informative dialogue.
I’ll let them have their way with the entire carcass and shall advise others accordingly.