Yes Emma! You've summed it up.
GPs are not expert in how impairments might impact on HE - that is the job of the assessor. I presume that what is sought is a statement that confirms that an individual's impairment is likely to impact on their studies at HE level as opposed to the effects being restricted to daily living? It seems to me that the way forward would be to issue GPs with a pro-forma to complete to confirm this - although in many instances the GP would simply not be the appropriate person, for example, for a deaf student their recent teacher would be better placed than a GP who may not have ever seen the person for anything related to hearing loss. Again, it is the assessor who is best placed to draw out the implications for HE.
To me, this is a move towards a more medical model of support with health professionals seen as the experts and the focus being placed on impairment and not on interaction between study and impairment or on adjustments to meet access requirements.
ATB
Claire
-----Original Message-----
From: Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff. [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Emma Rowlett
Sent: 19 June 2009 09:23
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Evidence for the new DSA forms
I'm a post-grad student and have been receiving DSA for almost 10 years now (first as an undergrad from my LEA then as a postgrad from ESRC). For complicated reasons I now have to reapply for DSA (this time from SFE) and have to fill in the new forms and produce the new type of medical evidence.
I have difficulties with the 'last assessed' question as I have a visual impairment, a hearing impairment, a back problem, RSI, and nerve problems, all of which were last assessed on different dates and I can't necessarily remember when! It was suggested that I put down the last time I saw my GP about any one of them which was only a few weeks ago, and will hopefully be ok, but I know someone who has congenital blindness where no medical intervention is possible/needed and hasn't been seen about it in about 20 years!
I've also had problems getting medical evidence from my GP that mentions impact on studies as not only does she not know what my studies involve (as I'm a postgrad) but she doesn't know any details about how my disabilities affect me as she only ever seen me walk a few steps into her office and sit down for 10 minutes. Also, all but the RSI were diagnosed before she became my GP and my medical notes are pretty hefty.
In the end I wrote some brief notes on what my disabilities are and how I feel they affect my studies. I invited her to use this as a starting point but to explore my medical notes for more details or invite me in for a consultation. I don't know if she referred to my medical notes but she did not ask to see me and has produced what looks like a useful piece of medical evidence. I will of course have to wait to see what SFE makes of it!
It seems to me that if GPs are going to be asked to do this they should be given some sort of check list of things that students may need to do and asked to indicate whether or not the student has difficulties with this (ideally during a consultation with the student). E.g. reading standard sized print, navigating around familiar areas, navigating around unfamiliar areas, hearing people in one to one meetings, hearing people in larger meetings, hearing people on the telephone, and so on. Obviously this may still be problematic but it would be a starting point. For example, my GP had no idea that I needed to travel to unfamiliar areas to carry out research, but such a check list would have prompted her to think about this. I know a few people have said on this list that they are going down this kind of route.
Of course, in my case I've already been a student for 10 years, but new students, particularly those with more recent onset of disability would probably have great difficulty knowing what they will need to do in their studies and whether they will have difficulty doing it. If they don't know how on earth can their GP? Surely that is what a needs assessment is for? In some ways I can understand SFE wanting to be sure there is a medical need for all the adjustments that are suggested but I really don't think medical professionals have the expertise to do this. Also, this seems a move away from the medical model to me and that worries me.
This is something I will be discussing in my thesis on print impairment in higher education and expect to be dealing with when I start my new job as a disability adviser in August. I follow this thread with interest.
Emma
On 18/06/2009, IanF <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I hope disability officers are actively chasing up all students
> applying to start this September and monitoring the progress of their DSA applications.
> We're now nearly in July and I haven't seen one student with a serious
> physical or sensory disability for DSA assessment yet.
>
> Regarding the online form, I think it was a mistake to remove the
> word 'ideally' from that section i.e. "and, ideally, how your study
> will be affected ... " - because the whole point of the form is to
> enable the student to have an assessment to work out how studies might
> be affected by a disability.
>
> I also think there is a serious problem with the question in section
> b in "DSA information and evidence" - "On what date was your
> disability, mental health condition or specific learning difficulty
> last assessed". Many students won't be able to answer that question
> while being perfectly legally entitled to apply to DSA due to having a
> permanent disability. They often won't have had their 'disability ...
> assessed' in years. End result being they're unable to remember the
> date, so can't complete the application form, resulting in them not applying for support they're entitled to.
>
> Expecting a GP or specialist to assess how a disability will affect
> studies (in a ten minute consultation?) or a student with a permanent
> disability to remember when it was last 'assessed; could be seen as
> placing an unreasonable barrier on accessing DSA and seems to me to go
> against the spirit and the letter of the DDA. It's all gone very medical model ...
> again.
>
> Ian Francis
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "swift" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 11:41 AM
> Subject: Re: Evidence for the new DSA forms
>
>
>
> That wording came from page 25 of the full DSA application form for 09-10:
>
> http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/DisabledPeople/EducationAndTraining/Higher
> Education/DG_10034900?IdcService=GET_FILE&dID=194120&Rendition=Web
>
> It is on page 25 of the acrobat document.
>
> If people have any comments on this it would be great if they could
> send general ones to the list, as I know other students who are
> concerned by this, and may lurk.
>
> 2009/6/17 Maiden, Arnold <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
> > I would be interested to know where that wording came from as the
> > guidance chapters issued by SLC are a little different and state:
> >
> >
> >
> > 69
> >
> > Students who are physically disabled, or have a mental-health
> > condition, will need to provide medical evidence of their condition,
> > such as a letter from their doctor or an appropriate specialist.
> > Medical evidence should state the nature of the student's disability
> > and *ideally should also briefly explain how the student is affected
> > by the disability*. Students with a specific learning difficulty
> > such as dyslexia will need to provide evidence of this in the form
> > of a diagnostic assessment from a
> psychologist
> > or suitably qualified specialist teacher (see paragraphs 99-106).
> > However, any costs a student incurs obtaining the necessary expert
> > evidence or opinion cannot be met from the DSAs. This is because
> > such costs are not incurred by the student to attend or undertake
> > their course; they are incurred to substantiate their claim for
> > DSAs. However, students might be able to receive assistance with
> > such costs from their institutions Access
> to
> > Learning Fund
> >
> >
> >
> > *Arnold Maiden*
> >
> > *Assessor & Assistive Technology Advisor***
> >
> > *Disability Services*
> >
> > *Leeds Metropolitan University - D109CQ*
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > *Arnold Maiden*
> >
> > *Assessor & Assistive Technology Advisor***
> >
> > *Disability Services*
> >
> > *Leeds Metropolitan University - D109CQ*
> >
> > * *
> >
> > * *
> >
> >
> >
> > *From:* Discussion list for disabled students and their support staff.
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *swift
> > *Sent:* 17 June 2009 08:50
> > *To:* [log in to unmask]
> > *Subject:* Evidence for the new DSA forms
> >
> >
> >
> > I see the procedure has changed to SFE, but exactly what medical
> > evidence you need seems to have changed too.
> >
> >
> >
> > It says you need to provide:
> >
> > "A written medical statement from a doctor or appropriate qualified
> > specialist confirming the nature of your disability or mental health
> > condition *and how your*
> >
> > *study will be affected by it*. It is your responsibility to pay any
> > cost in relation to obtaining this."
> >
> >
> >
> > The bolded bit has me concerned as in the past the LEA I worked with
> > were happy with statements from sixth form specialist
> > teachers/advisors, and
> even
> > the NHS bursary people only asked for proof from my GP that I did
> > have the condition that they said I did (so I have used literature
> > from 2003 for
> all
> > previous applications).
> >
> >
> >
> > Does anyone know of any easy literature to explain this to GPs? (so
> > that they write enough, but don't feel they are being asked to do
> > the
> assessment,
> > as I am fairly sure they would argue that they are not qualified).
> >
> >
> >
> > Also, this change seems to affect those with conditions other than
> > SLDs more, as the SLD requirement of assesment after the age of 16
> > has not changed, but apparently medical evidence that is post-16 but
> > 6 years old
> is
> > not appropriate.
> > To view the terms under which this email is distributed, please go
> > to http://disclaimer.leedsmet.ac.uk/email.htm
> >
> >
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
>
>
>
> Internal Virus Database is out of date.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.32/2117 - Release Date:
> 05/15/09 17:55:00
>
--
Emma Jane Rowlett (née Wright)
School of Sociology and Social Policy
University of Nottingham
[log in to unmask]
This incoming email to UWE has been independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were detected
This email was independently scanned for viruses by McAfee anti-virus software and none were found
|
