I have inherited a client who suffered PTSD and had applied for HRM on the basis of extreme psychotic reaction if leaving their home, causing them to curl up and scream or run uncontrollably into the street. They already get LRM and HRC. My case was looking 50/50 at best using CDLA/948/2000. However, CDLA/2879/2004(T) kills that particular CD stone dead. It does however refrain from making any judgment on the physical or otherwise nature of mental disorders (paragraph 121).
My client is physically sound, so my argument, I think, can only rest upon the physical changes wrought by the trauma (they were attacked by a group of men) to my client's brain and endocrine system. Their response to medication suggests that anti-anxiety drugs work more effectively than anti-psychotics and anti-depressants. The corollary is that their state of 'heightened alertness' or fight/flight is caused by physical changes to whatever organs produce excessive amounts of adrenaline, nora-adrenaline and whatever else is going on, as the anti-anxiety drug works specifically on the adrenaline system, which is not in the brain.Has anyone in ciderspace ever used such an argument along these lines? If so ho did you go about it? Thanks.

Just some additional info, which may evoke a response from another angle. At the hearing it was clear from the outset that the wing members in particular doubted my client's inability to walk (client has a severe people phobia too. Come to think of it, if more people were like the wing members, I'd have the same phobia). Client can walk in complete wilderness where there are no people, eg areas of Scotland. Trib's angle was that client can walk, albiet in such areas. Also wondered how client can undergo long car journey to Scotland (where client went to escape stress of Trib and other stuff)without breaks- service stations & whatnot. I suggested an adjournment to contact client to find out, but tribunal did not think the answer would assist. DWP presenting officer suggested client move house to somewhere more isolated. Hey ho. For my next trick, after statement of reasons, I'd like to pursue appeal to Commissioner on legal grounds of where client can and cannot walk, and reasonable adjustment (I put to Trib that moving was unreasonable and does not take into account any other factors, such as financial (in)ability to move.) Any suggestions?
Thanks.