IB failed medical, they are taking the mick big time!!!

celinepatricia

What sort of doctors are the atos examiners? just curious!

dmg24

celinepatricia wrote: »

What sort of doctors are the atos examiners? just curious!

They doctors have usually spent time as a GP, but some also have expertise in other areas and indeed some are Specialist Consultants. Not all examiners are doctors, as explained earlier.

WhiteHorse

I have provided you with information - you seem incapable of doing the same?

No, you have not. Please post the legal definition of 'Healthcare Professional'.

So you agree that few HCP's are struck off.

Your original contention appeared to be that there were never any problems of the sort that would lead to striking off. Hence my observation in that regard.

You implied that those who are offered retraining were to be put in the same category as those who were struck off. If not, I don't see why you mentioned retraining?

I imply nothing. I will however say without hesitation that retraining is sopmetimes used as a fudge to avoid more serious sanctions, even though they may be appropriate.

I am not aggressive, just bemused that your only source of information is the tabloids!

You are aggressive, and I'm sorry to say, frequently offensive.

Yes, I am referring to lawsuits mentioned in the press. Some are mentioned in the tabloids, some in other papers. Many are mentioned in the medical press and Law Reports.

Bear in mind that I am referring to concluded cases where the court has decided that there has been negligence. Papers do not report speculatively on ongoing cases as that amounts to contempt of court. Thus, we are talking of proven negligence.

donny909

dmg24 wrote: »

donny909, have you now called and started the appeals process?

Yes I have thanks, first thing this morning.

I simply asked for a copy of the original doctors report to use for my appeal. As the assessment papers they sent me are not the doctors original papers I'd love to know if the doctors papers when I get a copy of that is any different in the answers. But they did say it will take some time. As to weather the bigger workload means more than a month to appeal if loads of people are waiting for paperwork I dont know?.

In any case my previous post stands unless anyone has any information to show they dont do that at all and they dont reverse your answers based on 1 answer that has nothing to do with other questions.

Jowo_2

celinepatricia wrote: »

You really cannot expect a GP to be any kind of expert in the general requirements for the world of work.

But I can expext an atos person to be an expert!!!!!??????

I agree with ONW - a doctor has a personal relationship with their patient, is and should be inclined to believe them, and is naturally able to be influenced by them. One of the myriad reasons why IB numbers shot up from hundreds of thousands to nearly 3 million is because they weren't really in the position to determine if a person was fit to work - they had a limited position and were weak gatekeepers. They were part of the problem.

Here are some blogs which suggest that even GPs who did not agree with the patient are obliged to sign them off as not fit for work.

http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/10/conservatives-target-26-million-on.html

An ATOS person is truly independent and the tests they perform are consistent across all applicants and not swayed by personal entreaties.

However, I wish to stress that this is just a bit of background and context to respond to that specific post and those that dispute the ATOS assessment must and should appeal - they have a 40% chance of the decision being overturned by the looks of the stats.

Oldernotwiser

celinepatricia wrote: »

You really cannot expect a GP to be any kind of expert in the general requirements for the world of work.

But I can expext an atos person to be an expert!!!!!??????

The person working for ATOS doesn't make the decision - that's up to the DM.

dmg24

WhiteHorse wrote: »

No, you have not. Please post the legal definition of 'Healthcare Professional'.


Your original contention appeared to be that there were never any problems of the sort that would lead to striking off. Hence my observation in that regard.


I imply nothing. I will however say without hesitation that retraining is sopmetimes used as a fudge to avoid more serious sanctions, even though they may be appropriate.

You are aggressive, and I'm sorry to say, frequently offensive.

Yes, I am referring to lawsuits mentioned in the press. Some are mentioned in the tabloids, some in other papers. Many are mentioned in the medical press and Law Reports.

Bear in mind that I am referring to concluded cases where the court has decided that there has been negligence. Papers do not report speculatively on ongoing cases as that amounts to contempt of court. Thus, we are talking of proven negligence.

The legal definition of a HCP is someone who is allied to one of the healthcare professions. The relevant professions are detailed in the link I gave you.

The rest of your post is just ramble - if you think that is offensive, feel free to report me. Come back when you've got some facts and I will happily continue our discussion.

WhiteHorse

dmg24 wrote: »

Did I say that they were equal to a doctor?

If they do the same assessments as a doctor, and pronounce on the same medical conditions, and with the same weight, then they are being treated as equal. QED.

They are qualified to fulfil the role.

They do not hold a Medical Degree. Yes, there will certainly be some crossover in certain areas, but that's all.

Obviously there are some skills that a doctor will have that are above and beyond that required for the role.

Ahhh ...

celinepatricia

[QUOTE=dmg24_They_doctors_have_usually_spent_time_as_a_GP,_but_some_also_have_expertise_in_other_areas_and_indeed_some_are_Specialist_Consultants._Not_all_examiners_are_doctors,_as_explained_earlier._;)[/QUOTE]

Take note oldernotwiser... the doctors have spent time as consultants and have spent time as GPs and some arent even doctors at all!!

dmg24

donny909 wrote: »

Yes I have thanks, first thing this morning.

I simply asked for a copy of the original doctors report to use for my appeal. As the assessment papers they sent me are not the doctors original papers I'd love to know if the doctors papers when I get a copy of that is any different in the answers. But they did say it will take some time. As to weather the bigger workload means more than a month to appeal if loads of people are waiting for paperwork I dont know?.

In any case my previous post stands unless anyone has any information to show they dont do that at all and they dont reverse your answers based on 1 answer that has nothing to do with other questions.

You would be best to send in the GL24 form, or a letter of appeal now. The time can be extended, but for the sake of simplicity if you do it now and state that the reasons for appeal will follow once you have received the information upon which the decision was based this will be sufficient.

I do wish you the best for your appeal. However, remember that the DM/ Tribunal will be looking at your medical condition and not any maladministration. If you do feel there has been maladministration, you can make a complaint about this separately, to ATOS and/ or the DWP.