New sickness rules for gps?

shegar

Hi , Just thought some of you maybe interested in this report, I dont know if many or any of you saw the BBC 1 news at 7 this morning but they were talking about the new rules with DLA sickness benefits , (I caught some of this report as the dog barked so I didnt hear all of it ,) they had a Doctor (gp) on there who said that some of the new rules are coming in already, to do with medicals ..... ... ........

Doctor went on to say that they are looking closely into people who claim sickness for back pain and mental health issues, because thats where they think people are being paid for sickness when they shouldnt be able to claim for.........Doctor also went on to say that your gp can say that you are not fit for work ,but DWP can over ride their decision........

Perhaps someone can put the link up for the news prog, im not very good with puters..!!.I do think that a lot will change with sickness benefits and who gets it, the goverment is out to get people back to work and not spend a life time on benefits........and they dont seem to think people with mental health problems should be on the sick list.......We wait and see............

Brassedoff

You mean these new rules

Sickness over 4 weeks

So basically your GP can say you are unfit, but the DWP can say you are. You go for a test with a DWP medical body (I assume ATOS) who if they disagree will stop your SSP or ESA and put you on JSA.

I love the "What the GPs say is they don't have time to do an in-depth functional assessment and nor have they had any training in occupational health so we think it's providing a new unique service that both employers and GPs need". So if your GP who in some cases has known you for years and has seen you grow poorly or has seen the referrals to hospital, don't know you, how can a quick 30 minutes with a "independent" assessor say different.

If you take the same line, there gets a point when you say just WHAT does a GP's word or point of view mean. Could they not put all the money they are spending on these "independent" assessments and later ATOS into the NHS to cut waiting times and get people the treatment they need!

Reading this further, they are proposing being able to overrule Consultants too. Now anyone in work can trip, fall or become ill, they are starting to pick on the rest of society, which means this madness will not last. When they start sending people back to work with viruses, the rest of the population will start to kick off and understand who cruel society has started to become to the each other when vulnerable.


Reading this further, they are proposing being able to over rule Consultants too. Now anyone in work can trip, fall or become ill, they are starting to pick on the rest of society, which means this madness will not last. When they start sending people back to work with viruses, the rest of the population will start to kick off and understand who cruel society has started to become to the each other when vulnerable.

rogerblack

I have some sympathy with the point of view of the government - not a lot, but some.

The GP knows what health conditions(s) you may have - if you've told them about them.

They do not know - in terms of the various regulations how these affect the eligibility to benefit.

For example - my doctor knows I have Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

They have little clue if I can:
"Cannot either

1. mobilise more than 50 meters on level ground without stopping in order to avoid significant discomfort or exhaustion; or
2. repeatedly mobilise 50 meters within a reasonable timescale because of significant discomfort or exhaustion."

- and as the further explanatory notes say - do this 'repeatably, reliably and safely over the course of the working day'.

Simply as when I go to see them, I tend to concentrate on how I can get my current immediate health problem - whatever it may be better.
There is no time in the limited appointment to explain that the last time I struggled to the doctor that I was so tired when I got out that I forgot to collect my medication from the chemist, and that due to extreme fatigue, despite having written down the time and number of the bus I needed to take, I got on the wrong one, and ended up at the bus station having to take a taxi back home, and the first taxi firm I called hung up on me because I was so tired I couldn't give the address properly.
Or that I was only able to go in the first place as I'd rested completely for a couple of days.

In principle, a trained 'Health Care Professional' - who knows about how Chronic Fatigue affects people, combined with proper guidelines and an assessment that is not rushed could get a much better picture of my overall condition than the GP.

sheeps68

My first thought was all sounds fine in theory but an extra appointment when you are ill can be a nightmare and put back your recovery. I know the urgent hospital review when ill is an almost impossible task jus getting there and only of benefit when you get a productive treatment plan. It usually takes me 2 days to recover from the effort of getting to hospital and back along with the tests they have to do. An independant occupational health appointment would be torture in the times I'm off sick for a prolonged spell.

Brassedoff

rogerblack wrote: »

I have some sympathy with the point of view of the government - not a lot, but some.

The GP knows what health conditions(s) you may have - if you've told them about them.

They do not know - in terms of the various regulations how these affect the eligibility to benefit.

For example - my doctor knows I have Chronic Fatigue Syndrome.

They have little clue if I can:
"Cannot either

1. mobilise more than 50 meters on level ground without stopping in order to avoid significant discomfort or exhaustion; or
2. repeatedly mobilise 50 meters within a reasonable timescale because of significant discomfort or exhaustion."

- and as the further explanatory notes say - do this 'repeatably, reliably and safely over the course of the working day'.

Simply as when I go to see them, I tend to concentrate on how I can get my current immediate health problem - whatever it may be better.
There is no time in the limited appointment to explain that the last time I struggled to the doctor that I was so tired when I got out that I forgot to collect my medication from the chemist, and that due to extreme fatigue, despite having written down the time and number of the bus I needed to take, I got on the wrong one, and ended up at the bus station having to take a taxi back home, and the first taxi firm I called hung up on me because I was so tired I couldn't give the address properly.
Or that I was only able to go in the first place as I'd rested completely for a couple of days.

In principle, a trained 'Health Care Professional' - who knows about how Chronic Fatigue affects people, combined with proper guidelines and an assessment that is not rushed could get a much better picture of my overall condition than the GP.

Yes, but your condition is long term. This comes into play for example, a broken leg, glandular fever etc. Anything that will keep you from working more than 4 weeks and needing to claim SSP. If you had the latter, you need to rest to get better, who is to say when someone is better? ATOS, "independent" assessor or the GP?

celinepatricia

Think it would be better if the government concentrated on getting the healthy back into work before targeting the sick!!

Mupette

you can imagine dwp overuling an expert on brain tumours next...

twig1_2

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15801515

Brassedoff

I love the Daily Mails take on this "Experts believe the change could force at least 60,000 malingerers a year back to work – slashing the sickness benefit bill and easing the burden on business."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2063512/Dont-let-GPs-sign-long-term-sick-notes-Ministers-told-independent-panel-rule-ill-sick-work.html#ixzz1eA4UI7eG

So, no one is entitled to get ill? People are losing grasp on this story. It is not about ESA, DLA or anything else. It is about short term sickness. As in Man has job, man trips at work and cracks knee cap, man goes hospital for treatment, his own GP signs him off for six weeks as that is the time it takes to heal a bone break. The DWP sends man for assessment in four weeks, they decide he is fit, man forced back to work!

Years later, man has knee replacement due to not allowing the knee to head in the first place.

Welcome to Victorian Britain. It will be interesting to see how the organisation with the highest sickness copes. That being the Civil service.

Prinzessilein

So, my Specialist and my GP - both of whom know me; bothe of whom understand my condition; both of whom know what medication I am on and what side-effects I am currently having, both of whom are used to communicating with me via my carer ....will both be deemed unfit to sign the fit-notes that I still have to send in despite being on benefits for years?

Imstead I will see a stranger, probably woth a suspect computer package that only accepts pre-programmed responses. They will decide inside 30 minutes whether or not I am fit for work...

And even if I am declared 'unfit' then 6 months later I need a new fit-note and have to see the assessor again. Want a bet that it will be a totally different assessor? Nit the one I saw last time, but someone else who has never seen me but will magically discern my mental and physocal stae just be looking at me.

Maybe, to help the assessor, they will be given access to my medical records...written by the totally untrustworthy GP and specialist who are not competent to sign my fit-note!

OneYorkshireLass

Utterly ridiculous idea from the government as usual.

After 4 weeks of being on the sick last year (on GP's orders) I was still waiting for tests - no one knew if it was a short-term illness, or long-term. It was 3 months before I was put on medication - and that was via a private consultant. It would have been around 5 months had I waited for the NHS appointment.