Thousands will lose benefits as harsher medical approved

cit_k

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I had some free online tips about IB medicals from the website under discussion, they were useful, but tbh I did not like the tone, which automatically assumed that the DWP set out to screw you over and turn you into a liar. It also said things like 'your medical will start as soon as you enter the medical centre - for example, how you sit in a chair' and warning people to be vigilant.

Now why do they do this? Surely if you can sit in a chair you can sit in a chair and why should they not see you sitting in a chair? If you can't sit in one, then they won't see you sitting in one, will they?

Unless of course the point of this is to encourage people to say they are worse than they actually are...........

So you can make a note of how long you sat in the chair, and then use that at a tribunal probably, because they 'assume' that you have no problems sitting for long periods if they see you sitting for a few minutes.

Or perhaps, to point out, that monitoring is being done, so you can then tell the assessor the truth about how uncomfortable it really was sitting down, and how you could not have stayed much longer.

They are out to screw many people over btw, many people have experience that first hand, some (including me) even have proof positive.

Its why they dont like you recording the medicals, and wont sign notes as accurate, nor let you see the report until you are long gone from the building.

cit_k

dmg24 wrote: »

All proposals are on the DWP website. If there is further information that you do not think is there you can submit a FOI request. The beauty of the DWP is that as a govt body they have to be transparent.

Policy proposals are available here. There are some recent ESA documents that may be worth a read.

Unfortunately, the are far from transparent.

Try asking them for a copy of LIMA, its owned by the DWP, and paid for by the tax payer, so your within your legal rights to use FOI to ask for it.

They wont let you near it.

They wont even let MP's, Lords, Ladies (the very people who set the law on ESA) anywhere near it. They are keeping them in the dark, as well as the public.

Try asking for reasonable statistics on benefits/medicals, the type of date any reasonable company should hold - they will deny keeping it.

Trialia

For goodness' sake, cit_k, learn to multi-quote.

cit_k

Trialia wrote: »

For goodness' sake, cit_k, learn to multi-quote.

I did in one of the replies

But if you make a long post, especially about ATOS, then you get a load of people coming in taking the mickey saying they cant read long posts, because they are too long.

So I decided not to multiquote the rest, to keep it simple for those with problems reading longer posts.

Invasion

cit_k wrote: »

No it would not be nice, but it would be very important the truth was published.

Because the reality is, more damage will be cause by not informing people, than by informing them.

But petitions don't do any good.... (!) Do you seriously expect people too ill to work to write letters to their MP's all day?!

You've clearly never suffered a mental health condition where huge anxiety is a big issue.. Or you'd understand the damage that could be done with this email. They didn't outline the proposals, they put them in worse case scenarios, panicking people without giving them anything they could do about this.

seven-day-weekend

I agree with outlining the proposals.

What I don't agree with is the tone in which it is done and the way it is made to sound as though it is a fait accompli. Even the title of the e-mail sounds like the gutter press.

[Deleted User]

Personally i`m coming to the conclusion that all mention of b&w should be barred from MSE,once again i can only say that they are an organisation designed to make money out of sick/disabled people,they use scaremongering tactics to increase their membership and they have their own often dubious agenda.

cit_k

Invasion wrote: »

But petitions don't do any good.... (!) Do you seriously expect people too ill to work to write letters to their MP's all day?!

You've clearly never suffered a mental health condition where huge anxiety is a big issue.. Or you'd understand the damage that could be done with this email. They didn't outline the proposals, they put them in worse case scenarios, panicking people without giving them anything they could do about this.

I have suffered clinical anxiety, but even at its worst, knowing the *truth* is better than being suprised with a bombshell when its too late to do anything.

They did outline the proposals, by giving clear examples, the FULL documents are linked to in the FREE section, they DID give suggestions about what people can do about it.

So, please spread the word in forums and blogs and to people you know who may be affected. Ask any disability charity you have a connection with to speak out now, before election day, against these plans. You might also want to contact local newspapers and radio to warn people about the proposals.
And above all, contact not just your MP, but the other candidates in your constituency, and let them know you will not be voting for anyone who does not loudly condemn this shameful attack on sick and disabled claimants.
These plans really are a potential seat loser, but only if enough people know about them.
Members can read a detailed breakdown of the changes – and who is responsible for them – in our examination of the revised work capability assessment in the members only news section.
Sources
Building bridges to work
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/building-bridges-to-work.pdf
Work Capability Assessment Internal Review
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-capability-assessment-review.pdf
Addendum
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-capability-assessment-review-addendum.pdf

cit_k

woodbine wrote: »

Personally i`m coming to the conclusion that all mention of b&w should be barred from MSE,once again i can only say that they are an organisation designed to make money out of sick/disabled people,they use scaremongering tactics to increase their membership and they have their own often dubious agenda.

I cant see any dubious agenda, unlike this site, which clearly appears to have one, with a clear amount of benefit bashing going on regularily, deletion of information that would be useful to members (ATOS / BBC investigation), a clear policy of not allowing proper discussing of benefit issues in the benefits section (it all has to be black and white policy issue's only, never question the almighty DWP or the thread will be moved to discussion time).

Any thread that helps, will have a multitude of people shooting down the people speaking up for those on benefits, unfounded, and unprovable allegations are made against other sites (such as b&w, with no evidence ever shown).

Its clear which site has the problem with benefit claimaints...

cit_k

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

I agree with outlining the proposals.

What I don't agree with is the tone in which it is done and the way it is made to sound as though it is a fait accompli. Even the title of the e-mail sounds like the gutter press.

It is fait accompli unless public opinion can halt it now, the changes to the descriptors, detailed in the documents have been submitted to the DWP/Secretary of state and APPROVED already. Its happened, and will happen unless they are forced to stop...