Thousands will lose benefits as harsher medical approved

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

All claimants should have to prove that they qualify for the benefits that they're claiming. That is not the same thing as proving that they're innocent!

Noggin's post states that the examiners should provethat they're innocent (cross examining the doctor - how ridiculous!) which is even more @rse upwards!

Only when first claiming, once granted, the onus reverts back to the sec of state to prove claimaints guilt.

Thats why the medicals, which are almost always given after the benefit is granted, are clearly biased towards guilt over innocence.

Examiners should prove their innocence, the police have to, the courts have to, and ATOS have a terrible track record when it comes to quality of medical assessments.

If they are above board, recording of the medical, viewing the report and agreeing its a accurate representation, should not be a problem.

It only becomes a problem, if they lied on the report.


Why are people against a system that protects everyone?
Why do people wish a clearly (plenty of evidence) corrupt system should remain unaccountable?
Why do people think claimaints are liars, and ATOS are above reproach?

cit_k

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

As for the conspiracy theorists, well most conspiraciy theories have no substance, why should this one be any different?

The conspiracy theorists are people like yourself, who think there is some sort of great conspiracy going, where everyone who posts the horror stories about ATOS are making it all up. People who ignore solid evidence, who cannot see the vast amount of complaints, and charities/claimaints/organisations that have blasted the system.

People who refuse to acknowledge the truth of the matter, and prefer to live in a cloud cuckoo land where the system is fair apart from a few mistakes, and hey their is a right of appeal.

Sorry, but that is simply not the reality people are facing out in the real world.

You only have to look at the sheer number of appeals, and horror stories about the system.

seven-day-weekend

cit_k wrote: »

The conspiracy theorists are people like yourself, who think there is some sort of great conspiracy going, where everyone who posts the horror stories about ATOS are making it all up. People who ignore solid evidence, who cannot see the vast amount of complaints, and charities/claimaints/organisations that have blasted the system.

People who refuse to acknowledge the truth of the matter, and prefer to live in a cloud cuckoo land where the system is fair apart from a few mistakes, and hey their is a right of appeal.

Sorry, but that is simply not the reality people are facing out in the real world.

You only have to look at the sheer number of appeals, and horror stories about the system.

I don't think people are making it all up. However, I don't also believe that all the doctors lie. I have several friends who are Doctors (one is a consultant Geriatrician, one is a Registrar in A&E and one is a GP) and they are all ethical, moral and truthful people who wish to do the best for their patients.

I think the system maybe falls down because there is not enough communication between Dr and Patient.

Maybe the patient does not explain properly and the Dr writes down what they have actually said, not what they (the patient) thought they said. ( i.e patient makes a mistake)

Maybe the Dr interprets what the patient has said incorrectly (i.e. Dr makes a mistake).

Maybe there are a few Drs who can't be a£$ed and want the medical over asap, but I believe these are in the minority. My husband's last medical lasted for 1.5 hours!

But all the Drs lying? I really don't think so.

cit_k

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I don't think people are making it all up. However, I don't also believe that all the doctors lie. I have several friends who are Doctors (one is a consultant Geriatrician, one is a Registrar in A&E and one is a GP) and they are all ethical, moral and truthful people who wish to do the best for their patients.

I think the system maybe falls down because there is not enough communication between Dr and Patient.

Maybe the patient does not explain properly and the Dr writes down what they have actually said, not what they (the patient) thought they said. ( i.e patient makes a mistake)

Maybe the Dr interprets what the patient has said incorrectly (i.e. Dr makes a mistake).

Maybe there are a few Drs who can't be a£$ed and want the medical over asap, but I believe these are in the minority. My husband's last medical lasted for 1.5 hours!

But all the Drs lying? I really don't think so.

Real doctors (those who treat patients) are treating patients, not taking a nice paycheck for simply entering data.

You have to question the reasons someone who wanted to join the caring profession would want to not treat patients, and simply tick boxes on a computer screen all day long in return for money.

No one said all doctors lie, but a large number of people are reporting problems, a far to large a number.

It has nothing to do with mis-interpretation, I have had several medicals, in which (everyone one apart from one, as the first they gave me the wrong medical!) they have lied through their teeth.

Im taking about making up stuff I never told them, completely ignoring large sections of what was told to them, altering what was said etc.

Its common, and it is clearly more than mishearing or a misunderstanding.

How exactly can they misunderstand a simple answer?

How can they mistakenly put down the wrong answer, AND consistently miss it when they review the report before sending it?

How can they add things to a report that the claimaint never said?

Any doctor who lets a medical report leave their hands (effectively signing their name and professional standing behind the report) which is so full of lies, inconsitancies and contradictions is clearly not ethical, honest or moral.

Any doctor that KNOWINGLY uses the software as standard (without overiding it all at instances), that knowingly proceeds with medicals knowing that the reports will be of such a low standard a child can see through them is also not worthy of any respect.

You would not expect an accountant to use a random number generator to do your accounts. Neither would you expect your GP to drill a hole in your head to relieve a headache. People should use the right tools for the job, and if the tool is known to be unsuitable, only a unethical worker would proceed with the job if it is known it will put people at risk in some way.

Yet they proceed nevertheless.

A 1.5 hour medical sounds like the assessor over-rode lima (hence the long time for the medical), as each time they overide the standard list of answers, they have to put in a full justification of why they did so.

Those are the good assessors.

The ones that dont do that, who rely simply on the software, should be struck off for not noticing how bad the reports are, if they continue to use it.

Those that lie, I would like to see not only struck off, but up in a court of law.

Oldernotwiser

I have to say, cit-k, that your obsessive posts and attitude have done nothing to convince me that the system is as you say. Rather the opposite, in fact.

Like 7DW, I'm sure that mistakes are made and some examiners may be less efficient than others but there are many people who are happy with its working and these are the people whose voices are rarely heard.

I'm afraid that I also agree with cutting down the numbers of people claiming these benefits as I do not believe that this country has the numbers of people who cannot work as the current figures suggest.

The only conspiracy I can see in this whole sorry saga is the one where people were cynically moved from claiming unemployment benefits to invalidity benefits to fiddle the unemployment figures for political gain. Any moves now are redressing this phenomenon and are to be applauded.

I would like to see a system where people with genuine disabilities received good support in terms of facilities as well as income and we will only get that when those with spurious conditions and ingrained attitudes are moved onto more appropriate benefits before being helped to become active contributors to our society.

We are never going to agree on this, I'm afraid.

cit_k

Its odd you beleive people were moved onto IB instead of the dole, for political purposes, but dont believe the current system, and new system are seriously broken/abused.

Surely, if the only way people could be moved from the DOLE to IB would be if they met the rather stringent criteria.

Now, if they meet the criteria, they are unfit for work.

So it would not have been a political move.

Yet you say it is, so therefore, medical services (DWP/Schlumberger/ATOS) must have been corrupt and providing false evidence to the decision makers, or the decision makers must have been corrupt and ignoring medical evidence and passing people anyway.

Surely your ethical honest ATOS/DWP people would never do that?

Oldernotwiser

cit_k wrote: »

Its odd you beleive people were moved onto IB instead of the dole, for political purposes, but dont believe the current system, and new system are seriously broken/abused.

Surely, if the only way people could be moved from the DOLE to IB would be if they met the rather stringent criteria.

Now, if they meet the criteria, they are unfit for work.

So it would not have been a political move.

Yet you say it is, so therefore, medical services (DWP/Schlumberger/ATOS) must have been corrupt and providing false evidence to the decision makers, or the decision makers must have been corrupt and ignoring medical evidence and passing people anyway.

Surely your ethical honest ATOS/DWP people would never do that?

There are always going to be people on the borderline of eligibility and, in any case, that line can be changed. Many of the recent changes strike me as an improvement, certainly compared to the system that existed before.

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

There are always going to be people on the borderline of eligibility and, in any case, that line can be changed. Many of the recent changes strike me as an improvement, certainly compared to the system that existed before.

Care to name some of the improvements?

nogginthenog

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

And this is the heart of the issue, ONW - some people seem to think it is a great intrusion/hardship/torture to have to do this.

I'm not saying mistakes are never made, nor that the medicals can not be stressful, but no system is perfect and there is always the right of appeal.

As for the conspiracy theorists, well most conspiraciy theories have no substance, why should this one be any different?

The Right of appeal is at pressent is a kop out, a default setting if you like, and is being used and abused by people who know they at present have no culpability.
I see no reason why a claimant should not have the basic right, to see that the protacols at first contact are done fairly and in the first instance see that any imput to the software is correct
When i claimed DLA the doctor went through everythnig at the end of the medical, and said to my wife,is that about right and have you anything else to add.
When you go into hospital the medical staff go through your details and symptoms several times even in the early days.

nogginthenog

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I have to say, cit-k, that your obsessive posts and attitude have done nothing to convince me that the system is as you say. Rather the opposite, in fact.

Like 7DW, I'm sure that mistakes are made and some examiners may be less efficient than others but there are many people who are happy with its working and these are the people whose voices are rarely heard.

I'm afraid that I also agree with cutting down the numbers of people claiming these benefits as I do not believe that this country has the numbers of people who cannot work as the current figures suggest.

The only conspiracy I can see in this whole sorry saga is the one where people were cynically moved from claiming unemployment benefits to invalidity benefits to fiddle the unemployment figures for political gain. Any moves now are redressing this phenomenon and are to be applauded.

I would like to see a system where people with genuine disabilities received good support in terms of facilities as well as income and we will only get that when those with spurious conditions and ingrained attitudes are moved onto more appropriate benefits before being helped to become active contributors to our society.

We are never going to agree on this, I'm afraid.

Surly everybody want to cut down benefits, and everbody want genuine claimants to recieve help.
But putting in place hurdles in the form of appeals, is putting genuine claimants off.
The system should be seen to be above board and honest at the point of first encounter.Not at a upper tribunal.