Please Help - Have I been discriminated?

Emmzi

bendix wrote: »

Please enlighten me. I'm genuinely curious.

http://derailingfordummies.com/#educate

bendix

Emmzi wrote: »

http://derailingfordummies.com/#educate

I was hoping for a constructive response, but I suppose I was hoping for too much.

My question remains valid.

Here's another one: Is Britain genuinely the most mentally sick country in the world (as those figures above would suggest) or is the perception of sickness caused by the existence of benefits which encourage one to be 'sick'?

Uncertain

To get into medical school you need to be in the top 1% academically and to then reach the point that you are allowed to sign a sick note unsupervised you need at least 8 years (generally far more) medical training. Do you not think these people are better qualified than you to decide if somebody is ill?

Oh yes, they will also have had the benefit of seeing the patient!

Additionally, to get "benefits" for any length of time the person will almost certainly have been seen by one or more consultants and will have to have passed a so called "medical" conducted by DWP.

But obviously all these medical people are idiots and Bendix can make the diagnosis from his computer!

scheming_gypsy

bendix wrote: »

Excuse me if I'm slightly sceptical when I hear people are too depressed or anxious to work. Take away their rights to a benefit, and they will suddenly cheer up no end, I'm sure.

Although the OP has a job and wanted to go for an interview at the same place... which doesn't exactly work with your theory does it.

Maybe they're being proactive and hoping that a new role will help with their depression :eek: or is that too obvious?

ilikewatch

Interestingly I have recently had a similair situation on my team. I have a member of staff who has been off work for a couple of months with depression - her Med3 states "you may be able to work taking account of the following advice: avoid all pressured or stressful situations"

Due to the nature of our job it is impossible to avoid pressured situations, so the member of staff has been off since the note was issued. We are currently restructuring and the member of staff requested an interview for her current role, however, I pointed out that she had a "fit note" stating she should avoid pressured situations, and I can't imagine a situation much more pressured than a job interview. I told the member of staff that if her GP would retract the current Med3 and issue a new one which was worded to state that she could attend an interview then I was happy to interview her.

Apparently the GP didn't agree she was fit to be interviewed, and refused to withdraw the Med3 and reissue it with different wording, the member was therefore not included in the restructuring, and is no longer in post. I am assured by my HR department that this is completely acceptable and watertight.

bendix

Uncertain wrote: »

To get into medical school you need to be in the top 1% academically and to then reach the point that you are allowed to sign a sick note unsupervised you need at least 8 years (generally far more) medical training. Do you not think these people are better qualified than you to decide if somebody is ill?

Oh yes, they will also have had the benefit of seeing the patient!

Additionally, to get "benefits" for any length of time the person will almost certainly have been seen by one or more consultants and will have to have passed a so called "medical" conducted by DWP.

But obviously all these medical people are idiots and Bendix can make the diagnosis from his computer!

You're missing the obvious point that the more patients GPs process as unwell, the more they get paid by . . who?

It's a self-perpetuating cycle.

It is in both the health service and the welfare service's interest to have people 'off sick'. It legitimises their own existence.

bendix

ilikewatch wrote: »

Interestingly I have recently had a similair situation on my team. I have a member of staff who has been off work for a couple of months with depression - her Med3 states "you may be able to work taking account of the following advice: avoid all pressured or stressful situations"

Due to the nature of our job it is impossible to avoid pressured situations, so the member of staff has been off since the note was issued. We are currently restructuring and the member of staff requested an interview for her current role, however, I pointed out that she had a "fit note" stating she should avoid pressured situations, and I can't imagine a situation much more pressured than a job interview. I told the member of staff that if her GP would retract the current Med3 and issue a new one which was worded to state that she could attend an interview then I was happy to interview her.

Apparently the GP didn't agree she was fit to be interviewed, and refused to withdraw the Med3 and reissue it with different wording, the member was therefore not included in the restructuring, and is no longer in post. I am assured by my HR department that this is completely acceptable and watertight.

Finally, common sense prevails.

So in your case, she wasn't fit enough to work so she wasnt fit enough to be interviewed. As said before, she wanted it both ways. Unfortunately for her, she was hoisted on her own petard.

Uncertain

bendix wrote: »

You're missing the obvious point that the more patients GPs process as unwell, the more they get paid by . . who?

It's a self-perpetuating cycle.

It is in both the health service and the welfare service's interest to have people 'off sick'. It legitimises their own existence.

Ah, you mean like glaziers going around with bricks in their hands?

Hope you don't bump into an undertaker socially if you think that is how everybody works!

scheming_gypsy

ilikewatch wrote: »

I can't imagine a situation much more pressured than a job interview. .

it's 50/50... If you're going for an interview for a new job in a new company then yeah there can be a lot of pressure; but is it as pressured if you're being interviewed in your existing job? you know the people interviewing you, they know your capabilities and you have a decent idea of the role. You don't need to research the company or any of the other bits to impress.
Plus, how much does the interview go towards a role in an internal job? if you think the person will be a good match for the job then the interview is just part of the process.

ilikewatch

Uncertain wrote: »

To get into medical school you need to be in the top 1% academically and to then reach the point that you are allowed to sign a sick note unsupervised you need at least 8 years (generally far more) medical training. Do you not think these people are better qualified than you to decide if somebody is ill?

It would be great if that was the case, but sadly a huge number of (probably most) sicknotes are issued simply because the patient requests one, and the doctor doesn't have the time or motivation to refuse. A recent study published in the British Medical Journal discovered that Most GP's interviewed issued sicknotes on demand as they felt it would jeopardise their relationships with patients if they refused to issue a sicknote when requested.

Personally I think it would be best if all Med3's were issued by an independant 3rd party (such as Atos or similair) following a medical examination as there is far too much pressure on GP's to issue them whether necessary or not.