DWP, Medicals

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I can see that it does to you but is it a problem by the definitions that are used? I'm trying to illustrate ways in which misunderstandings can arise.

The problem of it being a misunderstanding (over medical meaning of insomnia or whatever) does not exist.

Because

Overiding rule - the report must be accurate and comply with GMC guidance.

1. The report is meant to be written (at all times) in non medical jargon
2. The report is meant to be written taking into account benefit legislation.
3. The benefit legislation does not care if you have insomnia.
4. The benefit system DOES specifically care if sleep disturbs daytime activities.


So a wildly erratic sleeping pattern obviously is going to disturb daytime activities.

Therefore, it should be presented as evidence.

Even if the benefit system did not care about that, the medical assessor still has to comply with GMC guidance/rules and must give an accurate report.

If the claimaint states they have problems, that MUST be reflected on the report. The assessor is free to add their own interpretation of whether they think the problems are serious or not.

But under NO circumstances must a medical professional give misleading/innacurate (or outright lies) statements on a medical report, such as stating the claimaint has NO sleep problems when they have very clearly stated they do.

They can write the claimaint state "blah blah" but in my opinion, this does not constitute a serious medical problem (or whatever) - but outright lying and saying the claimaint reported NO PROBLEMS is out of order, and a reportable offence.

FTW

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

I can see that it does to you but is it a problem by the definitions that are used? I'm trying to illustrate ways in which misunderstandings can arise.

ATOS doctor - "Do you have any problems with sleeping?". Me - "Yes". Well, I can easily see how that can be misunderstood by anyone.

celinepatricia

healy wrote: »

The DWP decision maker is never a Doctor.

./QUOTE]
So the "customer" fills in the ESA50 questionnaire, the ATOS HCP fills in his questionnair and the DWP decision maker decides who they think is lying?

FTW

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

It isn't the role of an ATOS medical examiner to be knowledgeable in any particular field.

And that wouldn't bother you if you had to see one? Much less his word over-ruling multiple people who ARE knowledgeable in the particular field he's commenting on. And as for your point about 'perpetuation of misinformation', that's just laughable.

cit_k

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

So the person you got on each occasion WAS actually medically qualified and was not a typist ot a plumber?:)

Its hard to know, they may have had their approval revoked.

They may not have passed the 'usual' requirements to be an assessor (as legislation allows them to waive requirements should they wish to do so, Im not aware that they ever have - BUT it is allowed, so I dont see a problem with asking if they are qualified.)

edit to add:

At my last tribunal, I wish I had asked about the doctors status/qualifications - as I found out AFTER the tribunal she was not licenced to practice medicine. [edit - Im referring to the doctor on the tribunal panel, who was out of order in more than one way]

cit_k

tb1uk wrote: »

i had my DWP medical on 20/10/10 10.30am at durham medical centre.

after months of emails/phone calls/letters i had my ATOS/DWPmedical recorded by the DWP using their own equipment.

the doctor did not use LIMA, he used a form based on my GP's reports. the doctor filled the form in with everything i said and it's all on the tape

the only extra cost to the DWP was for 2 cassette tapes at 50p each.

i have 1 of the tapes.

if you are due a medical, tell them you want it recorded. they have done it for me, there is no reason they won't do it for you

pass this info around to anyone that will need it and get your medicals recorded

Did the assessor identify themselves, or did they refuse to and remain anonymous?

Was yours the case where they agreed to the recording on the condition that the doctor remained anonymous?

cit_k

celinepatricia wrote: »

healy wrote: »

The DWP decision maker is never a Doctor.

So the "customer" fills in the ESA50 questionnaire, the ATOS HCP fills in his questionnair and the DWP decision maker decides who they think is lying?

Im not even convinced the decision maker READS the customer provided evidence all the time. I know for a fact they have not done so in my case in some previous instances.

They dont always read the medical report either, as evidence from the trbiunal president shows that many cases should never reach tribunal (due to reports that are so bad they should never have been used as evidence basically).

In fact, the tribunal service has stated the quality of decision making (and atos reports) is bad, and has NOT improved for over a decade.

However, it seems now, even the tribunal service is frustrated with the DWP as they have said in their latest report that they are not going to bother reporting the problems any more - UNTIL the DWP and others start to LISTEN.

i.e they are sick of talking to a brick wall that ignores the problems, and never improves anything.

cit_k

Oldernotwiser wrote: »

It isn't the role of an ATOS medical examiner to be knowledgeable in any particular field. It's the perpetuation of misinformation like this that leads to causes much of the confusion about the purpose of these assessments.

When it comes to a tribunal, you need to know the doctors qualifications/status/training/speciality etc as it comes down to the tribunal deciding which evidence has the most weight.

They have to decide which medical reports are the most credible.

If you do not know, and the tribunal do not know the information, they cannot determine which reports are from a more qualified professional.

cit_k

BBC radio segment where someone else talks about the lies in their medical report.

bobo09

seven-day-weekend wrote: »

Thank you for explaining. I do have a problem with this however. I do find it difficult to believe that medical professional consistently lie to the extent that is claimed on here. I would find it difficult to believe of professionals in any field. I certainly did not lie to the public when I worked in Town Planning, even though they did not always like what I told them. I'm not saying it NEVER happens, but according to people on here, it happens all the time.

Are you sure you didn't just get a crap assessor, who had made mistakes rather than deliberately lied? (Or maybe you got the one in a million who did lie - I just don't believe it always happens).

My assessor a nurse wrote on my medical that it lasted from 1516-1616. I was still in the waiting area at 1535 and was out her room by 1605, i left the building walked up a ramp and then used my mobile phone-call logged at 1607. She stated in her report under Peripheral circulation test-normal capillary return, toenail regains colour about 2 seconds after being pressed-for both feet, which is absolutely amazing as i never removed my socks and shoes. (which has nothing to do with my illness but why lie about it)
They fail to include other illnesses/ symptoms which are relevant to the claim.