disability living allowance - Page 10

mrmistoffelees · 14-12-2009, 12:44

No need to apologise. A mere yes or no answer to my question would suffice

lisajones · 14-12-2009, 13:39

Does your organisation class reactive or otherwise depression as part of the mental illness portfolio

The question doesn't make sense to me. Who is saying otherwise? We are a group of unpaid family carers. We don't have official opinions on medical matters or any special knowledge.

The main problem we see is that the government is going to put sanctions on almost all people applying for ESA. We are fighting to try to get at least some sick people exempted. We would like to see all sick people free of sanctions but that is a bigger and harder fight. If we can't get the most seriously sick exempted then we aren't going to reverse the whole thing overnight.

The government and the newspapers have taken a very hard line on this. They are the people causing this problem and theya re the people we have to convince.

mrmistoffelees · 14-12-2009, 13:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by lisajones

Does your organisation class reactive or otherwise depression as part of the mental illness portfolio

The question doesn't make sense to me. Who is saying otherwise? We are a group of unpaid family carers. We don't have official opinions on medical matters or any special knowledge.

The main problem we see is that the government is going to put sanctions on almost all people applying for ESA. We are fighting to try to get at least some sick people exempted. We would like to see all sick people free of sanctions but that is a bigger and harder fight. If we can't get the most seriously sick exempted then we aren't going to reverse the whole thing overnight.

The government and the newspapers have taken a very hard line on this. They are the people causing this problem and theya re the people we have to convince.

]

Ok, Ill try again,

Does the organisation that you represent class any form of depression as one of the mental illnesses that you're organisation lists? Is that simple enough.

I have a family member, who amongst other things has learning difficulties, a condition that leads to random seizures (not epilepsy) and she was assessed as a test case for ESA and was told (and I was there when she was told it.) That she was exempted from looking for work. But would need to revisit a Dr. every five years (I think)

Would you like to know something? She got a job, she works as a carer in a nursing home. not content with claiming benefits she wanted to do something despite living with a rather nasty illness.

The most seriously ill people are exempted from this. Yet again, you have little or no knowledge whatsoever of the subject in hand.

The key point you miss is this, there are levels of sickness someone can be blind in one eye or blind yet is perfectly capable of working.

The government have taken a very hard line because in the late eighties or nineties they wanted to get the unemplyment figures down, transferring people over from 'the dole' to the then 'IB' was the easiest way of massaging the figures to show a reduction in the unemployment rate.

Oh, do you know in the past what the secret tick box on a IB form was for?

Flyboy · 14-12-2009, 15:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by lisajones

Perhaps I can help here. I manage the blog on mental health and ESA that TakeCare posted.

What do you want to know? Ask any questions and I'll try and answer. ESA will replace IB for all sick or disabled people as it comes on line. At the moment it is only for new applicants so there isn't much experience of it.

The whole philosophy of ESA is different from IB. It's no good your own health profesionals or doctor saying you are too sick to work. The only people accepted as unfit to work are people with less than six months to live or undergoing current chemo or radio therapy. There are very few other exceptions.

Every one else has to undertake activity to get a job. The theory is that you will have a combination of support and conditionality. Conditionality means threats and bullying and sanctions of loss of benefits. This is done by DWP officials or their private contractors and not a court and there is a question as to whether it is against Human Rights.

We argue that Mental Health is a special case and just as people with mental health problems get special treatment under the law - they should have it in this pseudo legal process. Baroness Meacher makes the case brilliantly. She says that you can't ever fairly sanction someone with a mental illness for behaviour because it may always be due to the illness.

They did accept some of our arguments and agreed that if someone with a severe mental illness is sanctioned for not turning up or something like that then their illness is a 'good cause' to put at their appeal. But that just isn't good enough. Peopel with mental illness do not need to be threatened and sanctioned and then have to appeal. They may have paranoia.

Basically every one with any kind of illness has to go to meetings at the DWP and agree programs of back to work activity. If they fall down on them they get sanctioned.

We think back to work help is wonderful but not under threat. We don't think this is fair in 2009 and we think all people with serious illness should have the choices about whether they accept back to work help or not returned to them as individuals.

We want to get a campaign together on this supported by the CAB and all the disability charities. If you are involved with a disability charity please e-mail them and ask them where they stand on the conditionality and therefore bullying of the most seriously sick that they are supposed to represent.

Lisa, although you are clearly very passionate and committed to your particular cause and I am sure that this is a subject very close to your heart and that it means a great deal to you, but I am sorry, I stopped reading at "Conditionality means threats and bullying and sanctions of loss of benefits." What I was looking for was a brief independent and unbiased analysis of the two systems and how the changes affect those who suffer mental health issues. Are there such articles available?

lisajones · 14-12-2009, 16:41

I'll leave you all to find out more about it from sources that you trust. The DWP website explains how well they think it will work. They explain conditionality and the very few people to be exempted from it.

If you want to see why we don't like the 'condionality' being applied to very sick people you can read the CarerWatch website.

At the end of the day it is up to everyone to make up their own mind how they think very sick people should be treated. You may think a person with a serious illness - diagnosed so there is no question of fraud - should be given unconditional benefit and support and help to work if and when they want it or you may think however bad the illness they should only be given a conditional benefit and be subject to sanctions.

Flyboy · 14-12-2009, 17:00

I was really hoping for some proper information. My son is autistic and this will affect him as he gets older. Is there really no independent information?

lisajones · 14-12-2009, 17:29

Come and join the CarerWatch discussion group. We are all unpaid family carers and everyone is welcome.

http://carerwatch.com/

and then click on the discussion group

The NAS are running a pilot study of new people with autism going on to ESA so there is more information about autism than most conditions. Come and join CW and we'll talk about it. I'll send you a message when you get there about how to get the information.

See you soon.

Flyboy · 14-12-2009, 17:42

But then the NAS don't use such emotive language, when giving people the information they need.

Is there really no independent study, or analytical data, to explain how the change in the benefit system is going to affect those suffering from mental health issues?

dilli-theclaw · 14-12-2009, 17:46

Not independant no but the first place I'd be checking with is my local autism charity.

Same with me, I'm keeping an eye on what's happening by checking with my local sight concern charity.

mikebach · 14-12-2009, 18:08

The Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has released statistics in respect of ESA medical examinations. Out of 189,800 assessed, 130,500 were found fit for work (69%). The Secretary of State has not given the medical conditions of those denied allowances...if this is repeated for the 2 million (estimated) on IB, DLA etc only 625,000 will continue to receive an allowance.

The Atos Healthcare medical examination may not be carried out by a doctor. The examiner does not have access to NHS medical records. The examiner runs through a few simple physical tests. The examiner does not specialist knowledge of mental health, cancer etc.

I was emergency admitted to hospital having been revived by the para-medics. After 10 days in hospital I was discharged home with a primary brain tumour about the size of a squash ball. I was underwhelmed by my treatment by the DWP and Atos Healthcare and decided to publish all my correspondence (which still continues)http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatos.html.

Judge for yourself whether the DWP and Atos Healthcare are running a "benefit denial factory". The "fit for work" approach has been discredited in legal cases in the US and the Minister is considering the findings of the Parliamentary Inquiry. The DWP has stated error and fraud is under 2% and is the lowest on record. How does this equate to 69% denied allowances? If people (and political parties) feel the state does not have a duty of care to the dying, the sick, the disabled and their carers, they should say so and pass legislation. It seems to me people are being denied allowances by subterfuge. I am not even allowed a handgun to blow my own brains out....I have to see a consultant on my mental health if I put this forward as a rational option. The state is happy to leave me at home to be cold and starve and without food. I just wish the DWP would be honest and write to me and say you are surplus to the needs of the state and the DWP wishes you die quickly rather than say if you want 90 quid a week I want you to perform like a circus animal and then we will cut off allowance at any time. Humans should expect dignity. For shame.

TakeCare · 14-12-2009, 18:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

But then the NAS don't use such emotive language, when giving people the information they need.

Is there really no independent study, or analytical data, to explain how the change in the benefit system is going to affect those suffering from mental health issues?

Hi Flyboy,

Hope you dont mind me singling your post out, but like you I am interested in all this from the autism angle too.My brother is 42 yrs old,severe autism with numerous other physical/mental health problems.He is one of the lucky ones wherein his situation means he will be exempt from any new rules and regulations.However, others are not fairing as well and the pressue that some families are being placed under is simply wrong. We have elderly family carers who are struggling to ensure their loved ones are treat right and fighting so their sons/daughters receive the correct benefits.

I need go out just now so this is only a quick link..

NAS stories

Paula was recently diagnosed with Asperger syndrome. Her diagnosis helped her to understand why she was having difficulty finding a job, and why she couldn’t work in noisy or busy environments. She had to fight to receive Employment and Support Allowance, taking her claim all the way to a tribunal, because the doctor who carried out her medical assessment disregarded the information from her psychiatrist about her Asperger syndrome.

Watch here There are other stories too.

Its a nightmare out there and as much as it is right that those who can work should be made to work, by same token we have to protect the ones who cant protect themselves.

lisajones · 14-12-2009, 18:20

You have to do what is best for you. If you don't think the new system is right and want to fight for something better then join a campaign group like CarerWatch. Some of us think it is wrong and want to fight it and get it changed.

But if you want to look after yourself or someone close to you then go to a benefits advice service like Benefits and Work who will help you through the process as best they can.

The Disability charities have been campaigning quietly to try and make this system better but after three years of talking with government the government has gone ahead as it always intended to do and ignored them. The charities can't stop the government and now it has been brought in they will advise you how to cope with the system as it is.

nomadking · 14-12-2009, 19:06

At the moment, won't any figures based on ESA, be for new claims, not long term existing claimants?

Link to DWP website:- Decision Makers' Guide
Chapter 42, Appendix 1 gives details of 'Disabilities which may demonstrate a claimant has limited capability for work'

lisajones · 14-12-2009, 21:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by nomadking

At the moment, won't any figures based on ESA, be for new claims, not long term existing claimants?

Link to DWP website:- Decision Makers' Guide
Chapter 42, Appendix 1 gives details of 'Disabilities which may demonstrate a claimant has limited capability for work'

Yes mostly. It's mostly untried. It's going to be rolled out in pilot areas soon and people moved across from IB. Which is why no one can argue against it with evidence. It's going to be one big social experiment.

nomadking · 14-12-2009, 21:22

One thing that puzzles me at the moment it seems that, if you can't do activity X without help from another person, you get points towards the total, but if you can't do activity X at all, even with the help of another person, you get nothing. Surely if DWP deem it ok(ie no points) not to be able to perform activity X at all, why should requiring assistance matter as they effectively think it's ok not to be able to do the activity at all.