Dispatches: Britain on The Sick

[worried33]

Of course, it was started in the 80s. A very convenient place to hide the masses of unemployed people created by the government of the day.

 

The difference between then and now is, we had North Sea oil to pay for it all, but now we're skint.

 

we not skint, we have just written off and started a process of reduction amounting to 10s of billions in lost taxes. simply put its a decision made to take money from one set of people and give to another set of people.

[frank_begbie]

we not skint, we have just written off and started a process of reduction amounting to 10s of billions in lost taxes. simply put its a decision made to take money from one set of people and give to another set of people.

 

But that money doesn't really exist, its just invented by The Bank of England.

 

They don't even have to print it these days. Just type the figures into a computer.

 

"How much do you want?"

 

"Err, can you manage 500 billion?"

 

"Certainly Sir...there you go"

 

"Thanks"

 

"Next!"

[osdset]

But that money doesn't really exist, its just invented by The Bank of England.

 

Lol, that's fractional reserve banking for you, at least once upon a time many moons ago there was a gold reserve both here and in the States, Gordon Brown flogged ours off, and the Federal Reserve sold, err sorry stole the US's stash allegedly, but as Fort Knox has not been opened for the last 37 years no one really knows if there's nothing more than cobwebs in there.

[worried33]

But that money doesn't really exist, its just invented by The Bank of England.

 

They don't even have to print it these days. Just type the figures into a computer.

 

"How much do you want?"

 

"Err, can you manage 500 billion?"

 

"Certainly Sir...there you go"

 

"Thanks"

 

"Next!"

 

yes thats not good my point is tho, the money hasnt been saved and the actual deficit has gone up, its simply been moved to allow for large corporate tax cuts and writeoffs.

[Nystagmite]

Why is it that this country has the highest percentage rate of population that 'claim' sickness & disablility in Europe?

 

We are not at all a healthy breed!

 

Years ago, people with some cancers, Downs Syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, etc. would have died much younger than today. Now that they're living longer, it costs us more in benefits to help them.

[ErikaPNP]

I'll be watching both the programmes tonight, but I hope to goodness that this time they focus more on claimants who are badly let down by the system. Critics need to see the other side of the coin from the rubbish that is pedalled about in certain tabloids. We've seen programmes before on this issue and all they seem to do is justify the assessments which have already been deemed by consumer organisations as unfit for purpose. Usually it's a big focus on benefit 'chancers' and a tiny, almost obscure clip of someone suffering at the hands of an unjust system. Given the (successful) appeal statistics, anyone can see that getting it right is a huge problem. Let's hope that this time around, the real issue about ESA assessments is brought forward. People who should have got through the assessment and don't are part of the larger issue but aside from that, there are also lots of people who are falling through the cracks of the assessment. They are not fit enough for work, yet aren't deemed sick enough for ESA.

 

I won't name this person but everything written is on the public forum - if she wants to reveal who she is, fair enough but I won't do it as that is her choice to make. It's a member here, who is now on the third merry go round of ESA. A member who's condition cannot get better; as a progressive condition, it can only get worse. This member has the patience of a saint and it appears that everyone involved in her claims have agreed that she doesn't 'fit' in the boxes but that there is little they can do to help. Too ill to work, but not ill enough to receive sickness related benefit. She will qualify for ESA every time during the assessment phase, because she will likely always have an exacerbation by the time it comes to reclaim it after yet another failed appeal. Anyone else on ESA as long as she has effectively been will be receiving a component payment; she's been on the assessment rate for years now. She goes round and round in a circle, and it's an outrage that she has to 'hope' for her condition to get to a stage acceptable to ESA just so that she doesn't have the stress of the appeal/reclaim merry-go-round anymore. I have great admiration for this person and I really don't know how she does it.

[Nystagmite]

I have great admiration for this person and I really don't know how she does it.

 

I don't either. I admire people like her who have the patience to go through all this. I guess I'm "lucky" that I do meet several of the criteria. Whereas, I believe the person you're talking about doesn't; but is also too ill to claim JSA. It's a stupid system.

[transient]

Seems ATOS are on for a double battering, thught the beeb were going to go totally the other side of the spectru than the dispatches one

[antone]

Seems ATOS are on for a double battering, thught the beeb were going to go totally the other side of the spectru than the dispatches one

 

Yes, so far the BBC programme is a hatchet job on the WCA as well.

[honeybee13]

Well, I think some of the information on the Dispatches programme was exactly what people here thought was going on.

 

It seemed to me from the comments when they were questioned that Atos, the DWP and Chris Grayling are all in denial about how it works. Are they trying to offload the blame? I wonder if they'd seen the footage before they commented...

 

I thought both programmes concentrated on what's wrong, although I was a bit worried about the write-ups before I watched.

[worried33]

the bbc one is better than expected and I find harringtons comments damning, I think thats why hes resigned.

 

my parents refused to watch the channel4 show but thankfully they seen some problems still highlighted on the bbc.

 

and yes grayling was in full denial, he actually thinks the judge's at tribunals are getting it wrong and not the DWP, so clearly he disagrees with harrington.

[osdset]

The BBC ripping into ATOS and the DWP? Proof if any were needed that the system is flawed, if the governments own mouthpiece starts asking awkward questions.

[speedfreek]

I got that excited I wrote in the wrong thread earlier!

 

Dispatches

 

okay but; point scoring wrong and no mention whatsoever on mental health

 

Hardly surprising as they're sponsoring the new reinforcing (stage 2 of propaganda 101) the positive stereotypical view of everybody with mental health conditions should have no issues working! Especially if you can afford a daily trip to Harley St for treatment and claim MPs expenses to cover it.

 

Although undercover filming of the training was 'a right touch! as my WR chap stated when he got me DLA based on application form only!

 

Panorama

 

Neil Bateman (of Rightsnet fame) http://www.neilbateman.co.uk/ guys a legend!

 

Graying looking evil and shifty as usual. He almost broke into an anti disabled diatribe that would have made Glen Hoddles look Mary Poppins esq. You could tell he was tempted!

 

They actually mentioned mental health. We had token MH with depression in 1st half then an interview with an actual person and then a support team.

 

Death doom and destruction.

 

Let us all hope this momentum carries eh lads n lasses!

[worried33]

Mental health did get special mention on the bbc as they mentioned a guy sectioned under the mental health act been put in WRAG.

 

The DWP tried to discredit the undercover doctor at the end of the channel4 show saying he has political history. Which even if he did its not really relevant as this policy has been supported by all parties.

[debt4get]

yeah i was wondering about the political history bit....seeing as how labour started this odious company on this route...thought both programmes were well worth a watch..but graylings sanctimoneous attitude 'we can't just leave people' sums it up....and the doctors pushing on ch4 for figures 12% only into support group..highlights what all of us on here knew

[abc123def]

Gave me the heebeegeebies and my anxiety went through the roof watching it. Dreading my next assessment, last face to face ATOS was Feb and as I had evidence of overdose and hospital I was put in the support group with a recommendation of being left alone for 6 months. End of March had my DLA Tribunal and all the stress of that (which I won) and then beginning of May the ESA50 arrives and I can't cope with it eventually on the day it needs to be sent off to meet the deadline my MIND support worker gets a CAB lady to fill it in (badly) and it gets sent. My 6 months of being left alone (if you can call all that being left alone) ends in August. Really not sure I can go through it all again. All that aside both programmes were good and I hope it starts to change the public's perception of 'benefit scroungers' and undoes some of the damage the Government has done.

[antone]

Mental health did get special mention on the bbc as they mentioned a guy sectioned under the mental health act been put in WRAG.

 

 

Although they should, in all fairness, have pointed out that this was an error on someone's part - whether that be the DWP or the claimant's support workers. Under present rules, people in hospital, whether sectioned or not, should ask for form Med10 and will be placed in the SG for the duration of their stay. It's wrong that this should happen, of course, and someone has let this guy down. But it's not a systemic failure of ESA and there are plenty of real ones to worry about.

[Nystagmite]

Didn't know that, Antone. I knew that inpatients were exempt from the assessment though.

 

I have to admit that I Understand Grayling saying that we shouldn't just leave people on sickness benefits for years. But at the same time, they're going the wrong way about it. Sending people for assessments with long-term incurable conditions is pointless.

 

Talking from personal experience, there seems to be next to no help helping disabled people back into work. I think this is what's needed. I know many disabled people who want to work and don't want to claim benefits; but there's no help at all for them out there. The work programme has been no help at all. Especially as in my case, they decided they know my disabilities better than I and my consultants do.

[ErikaPNP]

Chris Grayling, on the successful appeal stats: "I think you have to look at why the appeals are successful. I wish the Judges sometimes looked beyond the first impression and thought is it really the case that these people could not return to any form of work".

 

Absolutely laughable. I wish he would consider that tribunal judges are not only given the claimant's 'version' of how sick they are; the DWP provide a full submission of their reasons for the decision to the tribunal and this includes the ATOS WCA findings, so it is far more than 'first impressions' that are available to the tribunal for fact finding. I also wish he considered before making such an ill thought out statement that the DWP do not know the reasons for the outcome unless they apply to the Tribunal for a statement of reasons, and if they do so and discover that the Tribunal have not applied the law (descriptors) correctly to the facts or have not taken certain facts into account (this appears to be what is insinuated) then this would be sufficient to constitute an error of law and the DWP would then be free to apply for permission to the Upper Tier Tribunal to appeal the First Tier Tribunal's determination. So, by his statement, either the DWP are not acting correctly (the original decision) or the DWP are not acting correctly (appealing to the upper tier when an error of law has been made). Either way, that's one hell of a closed statement and both theories lead back to the DWP.

 

Then of course there is the possibility that he doesn't appear to have considered which is of course that the appeals are successful because the system is not working the way that it is supposed to be, because the processes in which the WCA's are conducted are seriously flawed. That seems a more sensible conclusion to me, based on all of the content of both the programmes tonight.

 

A Dr had 4 out of 8 of his assessments handed back to him, with him being told to lower the points he'd awarded, and told this by someone who had not even met the claimant?! Gee, that really shows the system as an impartial one when a qualified Dr has his professional medical opinion undermined in such a way.

[Nystagmite]

the DWP provide a full submission of their reasons for the decision to the tribunal and this includes the ATOS WCA findings,

 

Aren't they sent the same papers that we get when we appeal?

[ErikaPNP]

Aren't they sent the same papers that we get when we appeal?

 

Yes, that's my point. It can't be 'first impressions' in the way he so clearly intended it to mean where the tribunal has information from both parties available for consideration.

[estellyn]

I thought both programmes covered some good points, but felt there were still some areas that weren't mentioned - for instance the fact that the WCA is not fit for for purpose as it does neglect certain conditions that make it impossible or near impossible to work, though they did mention certain cancer treatments that don't count. There are no descriptors for incapacitating bowel disorders which cause pain and chronic diarrhea (unless you also have incontinenece). no descriptors that encompass chronic fatigue syndrome or fybromyalgia (unless they cause mobility problems) or other illness like MS or lung problems that cause severe fatigue issues making work impossible. There was no mention of problems that cause pain but do not relate to mobility - for instance, someone with a brain tumour might suffer chronic and debilitating headaches that are impossible to work with, but wouldn't fit the criteria. There was just a small mention that conditions which would be made worse by working should qualify for the support group - but this is very rarely taken into account by ATOS or by the DWP decision makers. And that's before you even start on the problems with the mental health descriptors and way of assessing them. In my opinion the gaps in descriptors amount to disability discrimination in that certain people with disabilities are being discriminated against in not even being considered for ESA.

 

I have to say that Chris Grayling made me so angry that I had to pause the TV and rant for bit to my husband. And when Grayling mentioned 'tough love' I was nearly apoplectic. And as for blaming tribunal judges for allowing appeals - like they're soft touches who take one look at an appellant and cave in and give them the points!! had he ever been to a tribunal, he would see that the amount of information that the Tribunal panel can get from a person in a relatively short space of time, without the benefit an idiotic computer system, puts ATOS to shame. The Tribunal actually ask questions relevant to the descriptors, and they look at other evidence, and they actually listen to the appellant - and if the appellant gets the right info across and backs it up with evidence, and that info fits in with descriptors, then the appellant will score points and win their appeal. Its despicable that Grayling would lay the blame at the tribunals where the blame firmly lies with ATOS' method of assessment.

 

The most damning thing for me was the undercover doctor who said he did 8 assessments and only awarded points according the descriptors and his clinical judgement - and in half the cases he was overuled! He wasn't suggesting that they gave people benefit outside of the descriptors - he was working within them and was still overuled, which suggests to me that there are 'red flag' conditions that they are reluctant to score points on, and I suspect that back pain would be one of them, and there are probably others.

 

i also would bet that if the amount of people put into the support group by an assessor was less than than the 'average' that there wouldn't be an intervention by a superviser - only if they are above 'average'.

[antone]

Yes, that's my point. It can't be 'first impressions' in the way he so clearly intended it to mean where the tribunal has information from both parties available for consideration.

 

Quite. He gave a false impression of how tribunals arrive at their decisions, as if a poor, poor disabled-looking waif merely had to show up and cry "Oh woe is me!" and the tribunal would say "You poor thing! We award you £1000 per week and a new hat!"

 

In reality, of course, the tribunal is well aware of how the DWP reached its conclusion, it simply believes that, on the available evidence, the DWP reached the wrong conclusion.

[estellyn]

Although they should, in all fairness, have pointed out that this was an error on someone's part - whether that be the DWP or the claimant's support workers. Under present rules, people in hospital, whether sectioned or not, should ask for form Med10 and will be placed in the SG for the duration of their stay. It's wrong that this should happen, of course, and someone has let this guy down. But it's not a systemic failure of ESA and there are plenty of real ones to worry about.

 

 

I think from what I understood, that he had his assessment prior to his hospitalisation, and just received the results of that while in hospital - whether they filled in the correct paperwork for him once in hospital is another matter. I think the point they were making is that at the time of the assessment he was so ill with the stress that it caused him to be hospitalised - calling into question his assessment.

[frank_begbie]

Most people on the forum don't need to see programmes like this.

A blind man can see what's going on here.

 

The government give Atos a massive contract to lower the welfare bill and lo and behold they lower it.

 

In order to keep said contract, they have to do the governments bidding. So that's what they will continue to do.

 

There's no way anyone will stop it, there's too much money involved.