Failed Medical Stats.

Sixer

viktory wrote: »

Interesting to note that 36% don't even complete their application.

Of completed assessments, Viktory, which I suspect is closer to what you're looking for, the proportion (from the linked DWP document) of DWP decisions (ie before appeal) is:

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

33% of DWP decisions were appealed. 40% of those decisions were overturned at appeal. So by my reckoning, the 35% of people actually awarded ESA after the DWP assessment should have been 48%.

There's a lot of talk on here about ESA claims for mental health. You may be interested in these. I can't see completed assessment figures for that. But overall:

• Support Group – 5%
• Work Related Activity Group - 17%
• Fit for Work - 45%
• Closed before assessment - 28%

FleurDuLys

No, of course it's not something to look forward to! It is a safety net though, so hopefully it's reassuring.

I was in a very similar position, I took voluntary redundancy and lived off the money whilst I had a back surgery and recovered from that, intending to go to university in the September so I could retrain for a new career. I became ill and ended up living off the money until it ran out a year ago, and then I found myself having to claim ESA (which irked me, because I hadn't wanted to claim any benefits due to the hassle and the perceived stigma). I got contributions-based ESA because of working for years prior to this, but I'd have been eligible for income-based ESA if I hadn't, simply due to having no money.

Viktory - sorry for veering off the point of your thread. I had no problems when claiming ESA, I've written about my experiences of it here before if you're interested. I made a point of showing what I was already doing to get myself sorted with a new career and I think the ESA doctor appreciated that I wasn't trying to pull a fast one.

rogerblack

skcollob wrote: »

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

Am I right in saying that of those that had the assessment, 65% failed it and were told either to go back to work or claim JSA and look for a job?

If that is the case I presume that those same people had valid sick notes from their GP?

In which case it looks very much like GP's are handing out sick notes like confetti.
65% of sicknotes are therefore classed as being bogus - blimey and we thought the MP's were bent!

Firstly, GPs are not trained to assess peoples disability in the terms of the ESA regulations.

They can quite reasonably believe that someone is unfit for work, while the person does not in fact pass the statutory tests.

Added to this fun is that if you do not lie on your subsequent application for JSA, you may not get it either, due to being unable to fulfill the 'actively seeking work' requirements.

The new ESA criteria paint a very, very rosy picture of the workplace.
The disability discrimination act means that people with rather extreme disabilities suffer from no disadvantage in the workplace, and find it as easy as anyone else to get employment.

To quote another source - 'For example, a person with MS could: be unable to write legibly; experience pain using a keyboard for more than a few minutes at a time; intermittently have to use a wheelchair due to fatigue and mobility problems; take twice as long as someone with no cognitive impairment to complete workplace activities due to problems with memory and concentration; manage bowel function through self-catheterisation (which can mean very regular and lengthy toilet breaks); experience slurring of speech such that they feel unable to hold a conversation over telephone; and experience significantly reduced vision (or even temporary blindness) for short periods during relapses. Such an individual clearly has a significantly reduced capacity for work – but could score no points whatsoever under the new regulations, and thus be classed ‘fit to work’.'
http://www.ssac.org.uk/pdf/esa-amendment-regulations-2011.pdf

For example - someone who can learn to do more complex tasks than operating a washing machine has no problems gaining work.

Similarly - someone who can do a little better than "has some difficulty understanding a simple message from a stranger" - gets no points.

I'm not saying that either of these particular cases are deserving of 15 points alone, but that many people have complex disabilities, with multiple problems.

The lack of graduation in the lower levels in the new test is very sharp.
It does not reflect the fact that someone who has difficulty understanding ordinary communication, and can wash and dry clothes may have real difficulties in the workplace, especially if these limits on ability are accompanied by other problems.

bertiebat

skcollob wrote: »

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

Am I right in saying that of those that had the assessment, 65% failed it and were told either to go back to work or claim JSA and look for a job?

If that is the case I presume that those same people had valid sick notes from their GP?

In which case it looks very much like GP's are handing out sick notes like confetti.
65% of sicknotes are therefore classed as being bogus - blimey and we thought the MP's were bent!

No, read the whole thread properly.

cit_k

viktory wrote: »

Interesting to note that 36% don't even complete their application.

They did complete their application and were being paid the assessment rate of ESA.

They just recovered in the long wait before a medical.

The timeframe (in an ideal world where there are no backlogs) is a 13 week wait for a medical but the system is overloaded and people could face a much longer wait for their assessment.

During that time period, many people heal or recover from whatever injury or illness they claimed for, so quite rightly close their claim, as not to do so would be a fraudulent act.

cit_k

skcollob wrote: »

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

Am I right in saying that of those that had the assessment, 65% failed it and were told either to go back to work or claim JSA and look for a job?

If that is the case I presume that those same people had valid sick notes from their GP?

In which case it looks very much like GP's are handing out sick notes like confetti.
65% of sicknotes are therefore classed as being bogus - blimey and we thought the MP's were bent!

Evidence shows that its more likely the DWP/ATOS are classifying people incorrectly, ie bogusly ignoring real medical evidence and classifying the sick as fit to work. Then you have to add to that the fact that the ESA regulations do not match what most reasonable people would think of as a test for fitness to work.

Even the person who designed the test has called for them to stop using it, as its not fit to be used.

bertiebat

skcollob wrote: »

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

Am I right in saying that of those that had the assessment, 65% failed it and were told either to go back to work or claim JSA and look for a job?

The answer is still NO Andy. As you very well know from reading this and numerous other threads relating to this topic, the 65% figure quoted here includes the claims stopped before the assessment. I.e. many people get better and validly stop claiming.

That's as far as I'm prepared to debate with you. I hate misrepresentation of data.

cit_k

skcollob wrote: »

But I would argue that GP's certainly have a roll to play in all of this. If they were more aware of what constitutes the correct definition of 'not being able to carry out an work related functions', the number of bogus sicknotes would be reduced considerably. This would have a severe impact on the stats showing those that fail.

Currently just because a claimant has a sicknote, it is assumed by the claimant that he/she should be unable to perform the work related function test. When that person fails that test, they blame the DWP/ATOS - why not blame the GP for not taking enough care in handing out the sicknote?

Surely the GP has a responsibility to say 'no you can't have a sicknote as I believe that you can still carry out some work related functions - have you considered a change of job or career - have you discussed how you are feeling with your employer?'

GP's write fit notes for medical reasons, not money orientated reasons, GP's are under a ethical duty to do the correct thing medically.

ATOS are not bothered about medical facts, nor ethical behaviour as every single one of their assessors always acts unethically at every assessment every time - its company policy.

No one who has properly looked at the evidence who is not directly gaining from the ATOS setup actually thinks the atos setup is working or accurate. Everyone from the person who designed it to the people who review it to the house of lords knows its a failure.

Oldernotwiser

Sixer wrote: »

Of completed assessments, Viktory, which I suspect is closer to what you're looking for, the proportion (from the linked DWP document) of DWP decisions (ie before appeal) is:

• Support Group – 10%
• Work Related Activity Group - 25%
• Fit for Work - 65%

33% of DWP decisions were appealed. 40% of those decisions were overturned at appeal. So by my reckoning, the 35% of people actually awarded ESA after the DWP assessment should have been 48%.

It's late and my figures may be wrong but I would look at the calculation this way.
33% of 65 is 21 and 40% of 21 is 8, so I would say that the figure should be 43% awarded ESA rather than 35%.

MrsManda

cit_k wrote: »

ATOS are not bothered about medical facts, nor ethical behaviour as every single one of their assessors always acts unethically at every assessment every time - its company policy.

I entirely disagree. My ATOS assessor was thoughtful, helpful and used the system the best he could to reflect my health during the assessment. The idea that every single assessor always acts unethically is nonsense. If you believe your assessor was unethical then you can put a complaint to ATOS and report the assessor to the appropriate professional body.

To skcollob, yes some GPs with some patients will hand out sick notes for the sake of an easy life but sick notes in the most cases are solely related to the person's health and their current employment. If the patient is unable to work in their current employment then they get a sick note, in the majority of cases a GP is not going to tell a person they'll never go back to their job and should start looking for something else.

The purpose of the 'fit note' as opposed to the 'sick note' is to give the GP the option of stating that at the present time a patient is unable to fullfil their current role but would be able to do x y and z if possible. It's the X,Y and Z that the ESA assessment looks at - the ability to do 'any' work as opposed to the work you are currently doing.

Two different systems for 2 different aims and I think people generally miss the difference which why so many people get turned down for ESA and get upset about it. (I'm not saying some assessors are not just generally useless, there must be some of that going on as well).