Help my parents

caela_2

viktory wrote: »

Of course it shouldn't. If this were the case everyone would be walking out of tribunals left, right and centre, then claiming this as 'evidence' that they cannot work!

I mean, it's a demonstration of mental health problems in that the stress became too overwhealming and he had to leave. This should be taken into account, as they assess you for how you act. If people walked out when they didn't need to, they'd be faking it. If they walked out because they were visibally stressed, that's different.

Oldernotwiser

caela wrote: »

I mean, it's a demonstration of mental health problems in that the stress became too overwhealming and he had to leave. This should be taken into account, as they assess you for how you act. If people walked out when they didn't need to, they'd be faking it. If they walked out because they were visibally stressed, that's different.

And just how would anyone tell the difference?

seven-day-weekend

I understand that the man might have found the stress overwhelming. But why walk out and not come back? Obviously that is going to be classed as not completing the medical and then of course Benefits will be stopped.

He could surely have said to SOMEONE -anyone- at the medical centre that he felt so bad he couldn't continue and then other arrangements would have been made.

I don't quite know what the OP expected to happen.

Jowo_2

caela wrote: »

I mean, it's a demonstration of mental health problems in that the stress became too overwhealming and he had to leave. This should be taken into account, as they assess you for how you act. If people walked out when they didn't need to, they'd be faking it. If they walked out because they were visibally stressed, that's different.

I don't doubt the enormous stress the attendees are under, that it can be an intimidating process, and that some people will not be able to respond rationally to things because of emotional disturbance/mental health issues.

What I'd like to understand is whether the OPs father has been sick and workless for the last 10 years and if so, what kind of support is he getting to help him recover from his mental health and other non specified issues, plus whether he has current debt problems.

That way, perhaps the other posters can give pointers on the help that may be available to help him return to work rather than just the narrow focus on the impact of walking out of a tribunal.

caela_2

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

And just how would anyone tell the difference?

Ok just to clarify, I don't condone walking out of a tribunal, of course it's not going to help, but in this case, it may have been recognised as a sign of mental health problems in action so to speak. It's almost the opposite in tribunals- you have to show how bad you are, not how good. You on your worst day kinda thing. So yeah, if he could have, he should have stayed. But he was too stressed and this is the whole point of him having mental health problems- it makes everday functioning very difficult.

These people should be trained to tell the difference. Visible stress can be detected because of heavy or irregular breathing, agitation, moving, lacking concentration and finally, having to leave (the whole fight or flight thing). Someone faking might just walk out like they were leaving to get a paper. All disorders can be faked. How do you know they're not faking a bad leg, kick them in the knees? They will just have to use their own reasoning.

I see your guys point- he should have stayed. But the fact is he didn't and this could be turned around in his favour is what I mean, he should elaborate on how it demonstrated his illness. In fact, he could request an appeal on the basis that he was too ill to complete the initial tribunal. I mean ultimately, he didn't walk out cos he was bored! :eek: