The state benefits system mega-thread.

[Mr K]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Correct, they are not. What they are supposed to do is assess how the disability affects the person in their general day to day life.

After only having had a few weeks training? How about a properly qualified Dr. doing the assessments, after having had several years training in the disability being assessed? False economy from the DWP.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Mr K

After only having had a few weeks training? How about a properly qualified Dr. doing the assessments, after having had several years training in the disability being assessed? False economy from the DWP.

Qualified doctors used to be used for DLA claims, but the Government wanted to do things on the cheap. As you say, a false economy.

[Angua]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Qualified doctors used to be used for DLA claims, but the Government wanted to do things on the cheap. As you say, a false economy.

Boils down to the Tories continuing with a system brought in by Labour, whose inventor said was not fit for purpose.

Tick boxes can never fairly assess anyone with a work affecting disability.

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by Angua

Boils down to the Tories continuing with a system brought in by Labour, whose inventor said was not fit for purpose.

Tick boxes can never fairly assess anyone with a work affecting disability.

DLA and PIP are not about "work affecting disability". If you're talking about IB & ESA, then the questions asked are not that different. The main difference was with IB, you could accumulate enough points(15) by scoring a few points here and there, across several descriptors. Multiple minor difficulties could lead to entitlement.

You have to differentiate between a sickness/illness/condition that will be resolved with in time possibly requiring treatment and an ongoing set of untreatable disabilities.


IIRC A major criticism is that the system of assessments doesn't feed back what difficulties that are identified and accepted. The Jobcentres don't see the reports. It relies on further interviews to identify the types of jobs you can and cannot do and what other restrictions there are on being able to do a Job search, eg part time vs full time. You could be too ill/sick to be on JSA, but not enough to be on ESA. The "Extended Period of Sickness"(EPS) on JSA might cover some of that, but the maximum period is 3 months.

Originally Posted by Mr K

After only having had a few weeks training? How about a properly qualified Dr. doing the assessments, after having had several years training in the disability being assessed? False economy from the DWP.

We don’t have enough doctors to do their day jobs at the moment - anyway, it was retired GPs who used to do the assessments, not specialist medics (my wife used to work with them).

Of the claims that have had assessments, 82% of new claims and 88% of reassessment claims were recorded as having one of the following most common disabling conditions: psychiatric disorders (which includes mixed anxiety and depressive disorders), musculoskeletal disease (general or regional), neurological disease, respiratory disease.

Not sure if it’s feasible to give assessors several years training in such wide and diverse areas?

The biggest challenge the assessors face is they are not given time between assessments to fully complete the paperwork (or electronic version thereof), which leads to confusion and mixup on evidence given and those being assessed.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by Angua

Boils down to the Tories continuing with a system brought in by Labour, whose inventor said was not fit for purpose.

Tick boxes can never fairly assess anyone with a work affecting disability.

PIP was brought in by the Tory/Lib Dem coalition.

---------- Post added at 11:42 ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

We don’t have enough doctors to do their day jobs at the moment - anyway, it was retired GPs who used to do the assessments, not specialist medics (my wife used to work with them).

Of the claims that have had assessments, 82% of new claims and 88% of reassessment claims were recorded as having one of the following most common disabling conditions: psychiatric disorders (which includes mixed anxiety and depressive disorders), musculoskeletal disease (general or regional), neurological disease, respiratory disease.

Not sure if it’s feasible to give assessors several years training in such wide and diverse areas?

The biggest challenge the assessors face is they are not given time between assessments to fully complete the paperwork (or electronic version thereof), which leads to confusion and mixup on evidence given and those being assessed.

It was carried out by a mix of current and retired doctors.

---------- Post added at 11:43 ---------- Previous post was at 11:42 ----------

An interesting blog by the LSE about the affect on staff that the current system is having:

https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandp...re-plus-staff/

Some more info about the deaths caused by the DWP:

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...he-prosecution

The DWP were found to be in breach of data protection rules on the ESA50, so made amendments. On the first day of the new Parliament, they removed this amendment! I'm sure that this will be challenged and reported to the Information Commissioner:

https://mrfrankzola.wordpress.com/20...ights-removed/

[RichardCoulter]

New evidence fuels demand for a fresh inquest into the case where the DWP ignored it's own policies five times when dealing with vulnerable people:

https://welfareweekly.com/family-of-...played-by-dwp/

[RichardCoulter]

Everyone should have the right to seek help with DWP (or any other) issues from their elected representatives without having to explain themselves:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/...Odid9cz8_8VYtw

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Everyone should have the right to seek help with DWP (or any other) issues from their elected representatives without having to explain themselves:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/...Odid9cz8_8VYtw

I’m having some trouble understanding how completing a form stating what involvement a local MP has had is a transgression of some fundamental right. Or, for that matter, as the SNP claims, that this is somehow a barrier to making a claim, or an appeal.

The real reason for this is evident in the original SNP press release where they twist it into a Tory attack on devolution. To me it is rather more disrespectful towards benefit claimants because it is using them as pawns in the nationalists’ endless constitutional games.

[nomadking]

It's NOT about MPs, it's about MSPs. MPs ARE still allowed to be involved, and MSPs ARE allowed to be involved, just not by telephone, but by email or letter.

But her office has now been told the Department for Work and Pensions has changed the system and MSPs must simply email any inquiry and wait for a written response.
Fabiani is particularly angry as the new rule only applies to MSPs, with MPs allowed to continue directly contacting the Job Centre staff involved.

Do your own research, as the link )[conveniently) doesn't provide a source article eg from the Daily Record from July 2018.

Originally Posted by nomadking

It's NOT about MPs, it's about MSPs. MPs ARE still allowed to be involved, and MSPs ARE allowed to be involved, just not by telephone, but by email or letter.
Do your own research, as the link )[conveniently) doesn't provide a source article eg from the Daily Record from July 2018.

This would be because DWP is a Westminster department, running systems and services that are not devolved, and therefore while an MP has a direct interest as the local, elected representative at Westminster, and as one of the lawmakers that authorises the whole system, an MSP does not.

Which further explains the SNP’s agitating in this case - if it’s not about “disrespecting” devolution, it’s about highlighting things that can’t be done by Holyrood, because they’re reserved to Westminster.

[RichardCoulter]

Work Coaches in pilot areas (without any training in mental health issues) are now referring people for mental health treatment!!!

https://www.disabilitynewsservice.co...redit-project/

[RichardCoulter]

This is a bit too close for comfort for me:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/...ghthood-video/

[nomadking]

Medical opinion from 2005.

Professor Lindsay McLellan, emeritus professor of rehab at Southampton University explained that Andy's case showed how important it is to treat each case separately.

...
"With a head injury the whole brain gets a shake-up. Initially nothing seems to be working, but the actual extent of the damage is probably less than it is.
"So the recovery can progress over a much longer time.
"It does not mean you make a complete recovery, but you can improve if you keep exercising. If you are allowed to sit back and not do anything then you will stay as you are."

This month Andy Nicholson has the first of his trilogy of children's novels published - and he credits a serious head injury as the spur for his creativity.

So he has worked since the accident.

He has also organised fundraising events, including a sponsored walk.

It’s powerful stuff; it shows that the Department for Work and Pensions, under the Conservatives, is determined to gaslight people into accepting an unreasonable view that brain injuries can be healed, just because an unqualified assessor says so.

Fundamentally untrue, things CAN improve.

Usual complete and utter lack of info to be able to properly assess or judge anything.

[RichardCoulter]

Originally Posted by RichardCoulter

Everyone should have the right to seek help with DWP (or any other) issues from their elected representatives without having to explain themselves:

https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2020/...Odid9cz8_8VYtw

https://www.thecanary.co/exclusive/2...h-the-snp/amp/