Decision Summary Information

Back to Results | Search Again | Most Recent Decisions

Neutral Citation Number:
Reported Number: R(A)3/92
File Number: CA 368 1990
Appellant:
Respondent:
Judge/Commissioner: Mr J.J. Skinner
Date Of Decision: 29/01/1991
Date Added: 24/06/2002
Main Category: DLA, AA: personal care
Main Subcategory: supervision: continual daytime
Secondary Category:
Secondary Subcategory:
Notes: Supervision – schizophrenia – whether the fact that medical advisors have not arranged in-patient care implies that continual supervision is not required – whether it is relevant that supervision could not eliminate all substantial danger The claimant suffered schizophrenia and was at risk of committing suicide. The delegated medical practitioner gave two reasons for not accepting that the claimant required continual supervision throughout the day in order to avoid substantial danger to himself. First, if the claimant’s doctors thought there was a danger of suicide the claimant would be detained as an in-patient; and secondly, no amount of supervision would prevent a determined suicide attempt. Held that: 1. it was not reasonable for the delegated medical practitioner to infer that the claimant was not a danger just because he had not been made an in-patient; 2. contrary to the view of the Commissioner in CA/149/1990, the Attendance Allowance Board or the delegated medical practitioner has to find out whether continual supervision is required in order to effect a real reduction in risk of harm to the claimant, not in order to eliminate all substantial danger
Decision(s) to Download: A3_92.doc A3_92.doc