GPs should 'not sign off long-term sick'

**Maggy J** · 19-11-2011, 12:53

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15801515

Quote:

People should be signed off for long-term sickness by an independent assessment service and not GPs, a government-backed review says.

Hmm! Not sure I want some non medical person to decide such an issue?Will there be anyone with any bona fide credentials on this assessment service?

However.

Quote:

The review also suggests tax breaks for firms which employ people who suffer from long-term conditions.

Not a bad suggestion..Is this offered in the case of disabled and incapacitated too?

Quote:

It is estimated the changes would send 20% of those off sick back to work.
A Department for Work and Pensions spokesman said: "The government is committed to supporting more people with health conditions to work."
Around 300,000 people a year are absent from work due to long-term sickness.
The review also calls for a new government backed job-brokering service, to find work for people cannot stay in their current job because of their condition.

All sounds good..but I will won't be holding my breath.It only takes someone reinterpreting the conditions or some sort of bonus scheme attached to getting people off the sick for it to fail it's stated business.

This chap puts it better than I can,

Quote:

The deputy chair of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, Dr Richard Vautrey, said the changes could be a good thing for patients.
He said: "If what is being described is a proper health, occupational health assessment at an earlier stage in the patient's illness then that would be helpful.
"But if it turns out to be a punitive process just to try and save money without the best interests of the patient at the heart of the process then it will fail."

denphone · 19-11-2011, 12:59

Quote:

The deputy chair of the British Medical Association's GPs committee, Dr Richard Vautrey, said the changes could be a good thing for patients.
He said: "If what is being described is a proper health, occupational health assessment at an earlier stage in the patient's illness then that would be helpful.
"But if it turns out to be a punitive process just to try and save money without the best interests of the patient at the heart of the process then it will fail."

And the last bit would be my greatest worry as well Maggy.

Taf · 19-11-2011, 13:06

All this effort to get people with health problems into work might be better equally directed at all the people without health problems into work.

Ignitionnet · 19-11-2011, 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Taf

All this effort to get people with health problems into work might be better equally directed at all the people without health problems into work.

Sadly you have to know who the people without health problems are - some of them are masquerading as people with genuine health problems.

denphone · 19-11-2011, 13:11

l am afraid that genuine people with serious medical conditions and disibilities are being demonised by certain sections of the media who in turn brainwash parts of society into this thinking as well.

**Maggy J** · 19-11-2011, 13:14

It all comes down to how the assessment teams are set up..If they get that bit right I'd have no issue with it.

chris9991 · 19-11-2011, 13:15

Why wouldn't a GP be the best person to carry out the assessment?

Hom3r · 19-11-2011, 13:16

What about "Doctor, Patient confidentiality"?

denphone · 19-11-2011, 13:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It all comes down to how the assessment teams are set up..If they get that bit right I'd have no issue with it.

Yes l would have no worry but usually these assessment teams which are supposed to be independent are usually nothing of the kind and end up representing the political agenda of the day and to save money.

mertle · 19-11-2011, 13:29

absolute bonkers in my opinion who the hell does Prof Carol Black thinks she is. Another brainless parasite who thinks whe knows best because she got professor.

About time sometimes governments ignores the advice whonder who will be doing this independent assessment lets think 4 letter word begining with letter A.

Maggy J do we trust it to be done proper should those who have to goto assesment then goto such nasty people with there GP as spokesperson. That would mean GP forced into second issue dealing with more Paperwork or attending with his patient.

Its goto be most craziest thing ever fear this government has lost the plot to be fair if this taken up as policy.

denphone your right think government on its last throw of dice they wont attack the rich businesses or rich so soft targets will be thrown to the wolves.

It harbours back to the days when you got injured you attended pannel if they said you was fit you went back to work. Companies was forced to offer light work whether had it or not as they was fit to do some capacity work. Now this sounds fine but companies paid you they would rather see you out the building not paying you you getting state help.

Ignitionnet even government figures said it was 0.5% so dont think its widespread as papers making out. There people on it never had assessment yet others who had repeated assessments passed even Atos. Now if the system aimed to assess EVERYONE in 3 year cycle then you would sort it.

**Hugh** · 19-11-2011, 14:19

Yeh - why should someone who has spent their life working in the Medical and Medical Research fields, who is Nationally and internationally renowned in those fields, and was previously the President of the Royal College of Physicians, think they know better than you?

**Maggy J** · 19-11-2011, 15:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Yeh - why should someone who has spent their life working in the Medical and Medical Research fields, who is Nationally and internationally renowned in those fields, and was previously the President of the Royal College of Physicians, think they know better than you?

Hugh I've got no issue with her or the suggestion.I'm just concerned that whomever get's to organise this idea, committee or individuals will 'alter' the parameters or set up some sort of bonus scheme for the assessment teams.As far as I'm concerned the person/persons who assesses the long term ill must have medical expertise.What's wrong with a doctor recommending individuals for the assessment teams if the scheme is above board?Why do doctors have to be cut out of the equation?That's the bit that makes me highly suspicious.

The other suggestion for tax breaks for employers to employ those with long term health issues seems to be on the nail.

**Hugh** · 19-11-2011, 15:09

Sorry for the confusion, Maggy - I was specifically replying to the post previous to mine, which stated

Quote:

who the hell does Prof Carol Black thinks she is. Another brainless parasite who thinks whe knows best because she got professor.

I agree that doctors should be involved in the process.

**Maggy J** · 19-11-2011, 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh

Sorry for the confusion, Maggy - I was specifically replying to the post previous to mine, which stated

I agree that doctors should be involved in the process.

Ravenheart · 19-11-2011, 16:10

So GP's are good enough to commission local healthcare services, but the government can't trust them assessing a patients ability to work? The GP is more likely to see the whole picture, not just how the person concerned appears at the time of the assessment.

The schemes that were in place to help those with long term conditions and disabilities into employment have largely have their funding removed.

Now we'll see more of that "ring fenced" NHS money heading into the pockets of private companies and consulting companies.

This continual bashing of the sick and disabled is a disgrace.