(Original post by Tiger Rag)
Which means nothing, ime. Heck, mine asked me what one of my disabilities was. My non-medically trained friend could tell you what it is...
The tests are utterly ridiculous. I, for example, was asked if I could drive. I said no. She then decided that maybe I could because I don't have a piece of paper saying that I can't. I take medication which makes me tired, as well as not having enough vision. She then did an eye test which proved I can't legally drive.
The way the questions are worded are done to catch people out as well. And some of the assumptions made are utterly ridiculous.
Asking you whether you could drive is a one way question. If you said "yes" to driving an unadapted car then for ESA you aren't going to be getting a scoring descriptor for activity 3 (reaching), 4 (picking up and moving things), 5 (manual dexterity), 6 (making self-understood), 7 (understanding communication), 8 (navigation), 10 (remaining conscious), 11 (learning tasks), 12 (awareness of everyday hazards), 13 (initiating and completing personal action), 14 (coping with change (probably)), 15 (getting about (probably) and you would have great difficulty in getting activity 2 (standing and sitting). If you said "no" all it proves is you are not going to be getting the points for 6 (making self-understood), & 7 (understanding communication).
Similarly for PIP answering "yes" would debar you from 2 (taking nutrition), 7 (communicating verbally), 8 (reading and understanding), 10 (making budgeting decisions) and mobility 1 (planning and following journeys). Answering "no" would debar 7 (communicating verbally).
Realistically, for ESA, someone who is wholly blind but can read Braille and has a guide dog but has no other problems would only get 9 points for activity 5c (cannot use a pen or pencil to make a meaningful mark). They aren't going to pass an ESA assessment and why should they? Why should someone be entitled to ESA as not being capable of working when the Secretary of State himself was blind.