Parley and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

The Administrative Appeals Tribunal considered the case of Mr Parley and the Secretary, Department of Social Services, concerning Mr Parley's eligibility for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). Mr Parley, diagnosed with Parkinson's disease, sought the pension after ceasing work as a bricklayer due to his condition and experiencing significant financial and personal difficulties, including a suicide attempt. The core dispute revolved around whether Mr Parley's impairments met the threshold required by the *Social Security Act 1991* (Cth) for DSP qualification.

The Tribunal was required to determine if Mr Parley had a physical, intellectual, or psychiatric impairment, the specific impairment ratings his conditions attracted under the *Social Security (Tables for the Assessment of Work-related Impairment and Disability Support Pension) Determination 2011* (the Impairment Tables), and crucially, whether the total impairment rating was 20 points or more. This assessment needed to be made in relation to the qualification period, which was the date of his claim (14 February 2017) and the following 13 weeks.

The Tribunal accepted that Mr Parley had impairments that satisfied the initial criterion of having a medical condition causing impairment. However, when assessing his Parkinson's disease under the Impairment Tables, the Assessor allocated 0 points, noting a lack of objective evidence for the degree of impairment. Mr Parley testified that he downplayed his symptoms to medical professionals and that on his "worst days" during the qualification period, he experienced significant mobility issues, shortness of breath, fatigue, and occasional continence problems. Despite this evidence, and a neurologist's note indicating a "definite wearing off effect" of his Parkinson's medication, the Tribunal ultimately found that Mr Parley's conditions only attracted a rating of 10 points.

As Mr Parley's impairments did not reach the required 20-point threshold under the Impairment Tables, he failed to satisfy paragraph 94(1)(b) of the *Social Security Act 1991*. Consequently, the Tribunal affirmed the decision under review, meaning Mr Parley was not eligible for the Disability Support Pension.