Not Disabled Enough, But Not Able Enough Either

Wondering why, if it is against the 'rules' to consider where I work, or the sort of work I do, when determining whether I meet the eligibility criteria for the higher rate of Mobility Allowance, the fact that I am working, and, in the course of working, cover wards in hospitals and nursing homes, has been cited as proof that I am not disabled enough?

I feel as though I am being punished for refusing to fit the stereotype of the disabled benefit scrounger. Working seems to somehow go against me. I used my DLA money to lease a car so that I could get to work and go on my rounds every day at work. Apparently the DWP would be happier offering largesse to the tune of a princely (technically 'princessly'-- just look at the gender bias inherent in the English language!) 189 pounds a month (or whatever it is...the appeal has been going on so long I don't even remember what I was getting, exactly) if I was staying indoors and out of sight.

Gimperella Tries to Dress for the Ball

The second most offensive thing about my crutches is the colour.  The most offensive thing is needing them, of course, needing the relief from pain and exhaustion they (might) offer.  I need the crutches, but I don't know what to do with them, so I'll leave them in the back of the car I can't really drive. Hospital grey, with yellowy-beige-ish undertones, is going to be very difficult to accessorise. I can't believe I'm worrying about what to wear to my DLA Tribunal; how do I look disabled enough? What does 'disabled enough' look like? If I'm too well-dressed, too clean, I'll look like a scrounger bilking the system. Not well-dressed enough, I'll look like I don't take the Tribunal thing seriously. I need armour, preferably in an inoffensive floral print.