Hi all,

Client has COPD, Emphysema. Requires oxygen and nebulisor on daily basis. Obviously exertion of walking makes breathing near impossible. Have argued could lead to significant deterioration which can only be affected by medical intervention. DWP response is that client can self-medicate. Trying to argue he will not have access to oxygen/ nebulsior when walking outdoors so would need medical intervention.

Any ideas? Does anyone think this would be a viable argument? If so any Comms Dec?

Also arguing virtually unable to walk but consultants report may make this difficult.

Any suggestions greatly appreciated.

Not sure if Commissioner Howell's decision in CDLA/3188/2002 is worth looking at -

'... what the tribunal have to assess is the extent of the claimant’s walking ability taking account of any medication she normally and reasonably uses to alleviate the effects of her breathing difficulties and thus to reduce, avoid or postpone the onset of discomfort.

In the present case, that will involve enquiring a little further into which of her various medical preparations the claimant actually needs and is able to use to provide herself with on-the-spot relief for her breathing difficulties when out walking: since although a small inhaler of the normal type can readily be carried in a pocket or handbag, a 'nebuliser' is as I understand it a rather bulkier piece of equipment, and if it really is one of those that she has to take with her when out for a walk, the weight and practicability of this over any real distance will be relevant to the overall assessment.'

Thanks Ken will look at that one. Yes a nebulisor generally needs to be plugged into mains so pretty much impossible. His inhalers provide some relief but not always sufficient. Client has panic attacks as well whch exacerbate breathing problems especially when he is aware that he does not have immediate access to nebulisor/ oxygen.

cheers

rita

CDLA/2139/2003 may be of help to you

surely it's a physically unable to walk because of the COPD etc issue? as opposed to (or in addition to?) the exertion of walking requiring medical intervention.

if a man is that bad, he is in fact unable to walk.

Sounds to me like the sort of case that should be referred to chap's MP as well, if it makes me mad, it'll make the MP and the press mad as well.....

further thought; on the assumption that the chap's an ex miner, have you tried CISWO? they should be able to point you in the right direction for this type of case...

No not an ex miner. Yes absolutely going with virutally unable to walk as primary argument, but consultant indicates claimant can manage 100 yards before the onset of breathlessness, GP says 40 yards, claimant 10 yards! So as a back up will argue both points.

I think there is a vaild argument that exertion of walking would lead to substantial deterioration. He has less than 25% lung capacity and could not self medicate so would require medical intervention if he overdoes it. With the exertion arugment, distance is less of an issue?

Will give it a go anyway. Thanks.

Don't forget to argue speed, manner, time etc. The distance walked should not be the only factor and should be discounted if the speed of walking is very slow, for example