You are here: Home >> Case Studies >> Supplementary Welfare Allowance >> SWA
Question At Issue:
Refusal of diet supplement on grounds of parental income.
Background:
The appellant applied to his local Health Board for payment of a diet supplement under the Supplementary Welfare Allowance scheme. He made the application in respect of his son whose needs in this regard arose from the diagnosis of diabetes. His application was refused on grounds that he had means derived from full-time employment, and this decision was upheld subsequently by an Appeals Officer of the Health Board. The amount at issue was €6.35 per week.
Oral Hearing:
The appellant was accompanied by his
wife. The Superintendent Community Welfare Officer
attended at the request of the Appeals Officer.
The Superintendent Community Welfare Officer outlined
the calculation used in assessing means. He indicated that,
essentially, household income would need to approximate
that of a social welfare payment in order for someone to
qualify for the supplement. He stated that the appellant’s
means exceeded the limits provided for in relation to the
Supplementary Welfare Allowance scheme and, as such,
precluded payment of a diet supplement.
The appellant submitted that diet is a crucial element in
the management of diabetes. He reported on his son’s
dietary requirements, and provided supporting medical
evidence. He stated that a medical card had been granted
solely on the basis of illness (the ordinary means test
having been waived), and asserted that a diet supplement
should be provided on the same basis. He argued for the
payment of a diet supplement, as of right, where a child
has a prescribed medical condition such as diabetes, and
a medical card has been provided without reference to his
parents’ means.
Consideration of the Appeals Officer:
The Appeals Officer
considered that the case for payment of a diet supplement
had been well made. She concluded, however, that the
decision to refuse the appellant’s claim was correct, having
regard to the legislation governing the Supplementary
Welfare Allowance scheme and that, accordingly, the
appeal must fail.
The Appeals Officer considered that the issues highlighted
by this case, and the operation of current legislative
provisions in this regard, should be examined. Accordingly,
the Chief Appeals Officer referred the question for
consideration by the Department of Social and Family Affairs.
Outcome:
Appeal disallowed.
End of Document
