We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
DLA Troubles - ATOS liars!
Comments
-
That logic applies to claimants too. Do you really think a claimant who is borderline eligable would be totally objective about the process? Or wouldn't present bias to ensure eligability? Really, truthfully? The reality is that those who end up at appeals and tribunals are most likely to be bias, many to the extreme as sometimes evidenced on mse.If they did they may as well kiss goodbye to the money.
This is why their judgement is questioned - they are not impartial and are obviously going to present bias.
They have listened. The well publicised harringtons review listened and changed things for the better. The further review will do the same.Now consider that impartial parties/ organisations have highlighted the
shortcomings, and, if they were professional, they would listen to what is being said by such organisations.
0 -
So, no matter how much is read in books, webpages, articles, reports, reviews, hansard etc etc, nothing substitues experience right?
No one becomes a surgeon just by reading about surgery (well, unless they work for Atoss
).
But, what's your own experience of these assessments?In that case, the atos assessors have daily experience of the assessments (not just the an occasional assessment that a client would have).
Never said they didn't have experience.
However, they're blinkered in their biased view and the fact that they work for the company, means that their view would not be credible.
If that sounds silly, then it's only your own view in reverse - but it does apply to 100% of Atoss staff members who condut these assessments.Based on this experience, they are therefore in a far better position to clarify the rights and wrongs of the process than any claimant.
When Atoss are not abusing that process, that is, but even so, what's your own experience of these assessments?That and the fact they are professionals.
Very highly debatable. But you said before that you don't use Atos, and so how would you know that they're professionals?Curious why some question their judgement then.;)
It's utterly unsurprising why people question their judgement.0 -
Oldernotwiser wrote: »I have views on crime and punishment. Are my views less valid than those of a convicted burglar?
Views, no - but we're not discussing crime and punishment.
In answer to your question though, it depends what aspect of crime and punishment you mean exactly.
Are you talking about workings/failings of the process? If so, then a convicted burglar's likely to know more than you about that - unless you've had experiences on that score as well.0 -
That logic applies to claimants too. Do you really think a claimant who is borderline eligable would be totally objective about the process? Or wouldn't present bias to ensure eligability? Really, truthfully? The reality is that those who end up at appeals and tribunals are most likely to be bias, many to the extreme as sometimes evidenced on mse.
As Atoss are already 100% biased, whether a claimant is biased is beside the point, and irrelevant.
100% of claimants cannot be biased - your post above has just admitted it.They have listened. The well publicised harringtons review listened and changed things for the better. The further review will do the same.
How have they changed things for the better? What experience do you have of these assessments - old and new?0 -
Have to say that claimants are also 100% biased.0
-
That logic applies to claimants too. Do you really think a claimant who is borderline eligable would be totally objective about the process? Or wouldn't present bias to ensure eligability? Really, truthfully? The reality is that those who end up at appeals and tribunals are most likely to be bias, many to the extreme as sometimes evidenced on mse.
They have listened. The well publicised harringtons review listened and changed things for the better. The further review will do the same.
Yes the bias may work both ways, but I hardly think that everyone who has to appeal are bias, they just know their own bodies and minds and they know if important evidence has been missed and so forth.
Mistakes are made, the system does need improvement, and as for listening, they are only listening to Harrington, who is not dealing with all important points raised.“How people treat you becomes their karma; how you react becomes yours.”0 -
Oldernotwiser wrote: »I have views on crime and punishment. Are my views less valid than those of a convicted burglar?
If the view was about the process of burgling a house, or the treatment a burglar gets when arrested, or what it was like in jail etc, then yes, most likely the burglar would have more experience than you in those areas.
However, its not the case of your views being invalid, its a case of your views being just that, views, which would not in that instance be based on any actual first hand experience (unless you clarified what that experience was).
How do you think people would view you if
a) you refused to answer what experience you had on the topic
b) were a regular poster on that topic
c) stated that your views are better than all peoples views who have had direct negative experiences.
d) stated your views as facts, when they are usually opinions, without evidence to back them up, that often fly in the face of well established mountains of evidence
e) tried tricks like trying to discredit posters
f) ignored a lot of what people say to that discounts your points
g) Called people with opposing views biased, but refused to admit bias in yourself, if you only ever saw side of a debate?
Do you think people would take you seriously?[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
Saying people who have to win at appeal are biased, is like saying you wont accept testimony from a rape victim because they are biased as they had to go to court to prove the truth.
Its simply the case, these people have direct experience of the failings of the system, and have successfully managed to prove those failings, by winning their case.
When you try to find the problems with a system, you need the people with knowledge of what is wrong to speak up, to ignore it and claim they are biased is basically saying all victims of crime should not bother reporting crime, as they are obviously biased, as they had a negative experience.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0 -
With their multi million pound contract, they are not going to deliver an impartial review of the shortcomings of their process are they?
If they did they may as well kiss goodbye to the money.
This is why their judgement is questioned - they are not impartial and are obviously going to present bias.
Now consider that impartial parties/ organisations have highlighted the
shortcomings, and, if they were professional, they would listen to what is being said by such organisations.
ATOS assessors are unlikely to tell the truth are they, not whilst in employment anyway. Whistleblowing whilst in employment is a dangerous option.
Some have spoken out after leaving employment though.
Like for example this one“I worked for Atos as a ‘disability analyst’ thinking I would be helping vulnerable people to access their benefits,” she said.
“I soon discovered that nothing could be further from the truth.
The rules laid down by the bosses are designed to catch people out.”
Jean says that anyone deemed capable of looking after themselves or a child,
however difficult they find it, is judged to be capable of work and taken off benefits.
If you turn up to your claimant interview in nice clothes, you’ve failed, she says.
If you turn up washed and with your hair neat, you’ve failed.
And, if you turn up with your kids, you’ve failed.
She described the way that claimants with serious lung diseases were regularly assessed as capable of work because they could sit in front of a computer and type.How are you supposed to assess all of them, and the impact they have on a person,
and then write up a full report in just 45 minutes?
You can’t.
And, because it is not done properly, thousands of people are losing the benefits they are entitled to.
After more than 20 years in the NHS caring for patients, Jean says she could not carry on working for Atos and left shortly after she started.
The job was making me sick, she said.
It’s against my principles to treat people with long term illnesses in such a disgusting way, so I had to give it up.
People go into those interviews and talk openly to you because you are a nurse and they trust you.
Then your skills are used against them, to take away their benefits and destroy their lives.
I can’t be a part of that.[greenhighlight]but it matters when the most senior politician in the land is happy to use language and examples that are simply not true.
[/greenhighlight][redtitle]
The impact of this is to stigmatise people on benefits,
and we should be deeply worried about that[/redtitle](house of lords debate, talking about Cameron)0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards