Dispatches and Panorama programmes about Atos.

sparkycat2

trastor wrote: »

The physically disabled still have a brain that they can use and I find it incredible to suggest that they should be written off.

Some people don't need physical adaptions, they need to adapt their way of thinking.

those that say they can't - can't does exist in my vocabulary it means won't!

Can't may not exist in your vocabulary but if you have no legs you can not walk, while if you have some conditions walking may cause you severe pain and discomfort or physical harm including collapsing or even dying.

There are a vast number of different disabilities and illnesses. Not all are simply I have one leg or I have one arm, I will persevere, adapt and make do, possibly using aids or adaptations. The person may suffer pain, discomfort, distress or deteriorating health if they attempt to do some things or in their everyday struggle to survive and live.

Some people are limited in what they can and can not or should not do. They are not just giving up or being lazy.

As for those with physical conditions should use their brain. Not ever able person is clever or educated enough to have a job that relies on their brain rather than their body. At what point of physical disability and care and mobility needs do you want to start giving unconditional support, at the point they need a carer for basic care needs like using a toilet or eating and drinking or incase they have a seizure, etc... A guy who could only blink his eyes wrote a book, so he was working, should benefits to people who can blink an eye be conditional and have sanctions regimes, be expected to work.

Also pain, discomfort and distress due to a physical condition, and medication can have a effect on the persons ability to concentrate, etc...

sparkycat2

Sorry but I don't agree.

2010 UK Vs. EU average.
36% of the UK working aged disabled are economically inactive and do not want to work. Vs. 32.7% of the EU working aged disabled.
UK Vs. OECD Non working working age disability claimant rates as a percentage of total working age population (20-64 years old) in the UK SDA/IB/ESA is about 7.1%, one percentage point higher than the OECD average figure which is about 6%.

The UK government has stated it wants to get 2/3rds of those on disability benefits off disability benefits. Does this not seem a very high number. Especially since 70% of those on IB who are denied ESA are according to the DWP expected to remain reliant on welfare benefits, and in addition many are expected to be reliant on family due to household means testing removing their eligibility to welfare benefits.

errr yes I do! I currently receive DLA (HRM & MRC), ESA - in the Support Group for 3 years, Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit - 40% disabled.

So you are currently in the ESA support group, you have not had your benefits reduced and are not subject to conditionality and sanctions and are exempt from the time limiting of contributions based ESA. So the system works for you. Lucky you.

But the difference between you and me is that I won't let my inabilities stop me from working! I am currently building up another business under the Permitted Work rules. I'm hoping that by the time I am 65 in June 2014, when the ESA will cease, and when I will lose my DLA with the transfer over to PIP, that I can once again support myself.

Yes you would of kept IB for another 5 years after state pension age, but will lose ESA when you are 65. Since you will be 65 in June 2014 I think the change to PIP might not effect you depending on when your DLA is due for review as PIP starts in April 2013 and the rolling transfer DLA to PIP is 2014-2016. I believe PIP like DLA must have a claim started before the age of 65 but will continue to be paid past state retirement age. Has this been changed?

You presumably are happy under the new system because you do not have lots of additional living costs due to disability or have other sources of income to meet those costs. That is you can survive with out the IB and since you think you will lose DLA can survive without DLA.

By the way I have the good fortune to be perfectly healthy.

My brother on the other had is in his forties and currently receives DLA (HRC & LRM) SDA (80%+ disabled) Income Support on Grounds of Disability with Disability Premium and Enhanced Disability Premium, he would also get Severe Disability Premium if he lived alone

No he doesn't because he won't allow himself to be incapable!

You can not claim disability benefits because you choose to be incapable you have to be incapable due to disabled or illness.

Why throw more money away. No one has given me any extra to get off my backside, I have done it myself.

So your attitude is what I'm alright sod you, that they are a waste of money regardless of their level limited work capability or barriers to employability they face. Because you think if you can do it they can.
Do you imagine yourself the most disabled person in the country from the most disadvantaged background facing the largest barriers to employment, with the worst luck and least ability to work but with the determination to succeed. That attitude is all one needs. Or imagine others you may know or may have read about to be such paragons that every ill or disabled person could emulate if they chose to.

JSA is only £56.25 under 25 years old, £71.00 over 25 years old. Housing benefit is for those under 35 years old enough for a room in a shared house. You might be happy to see even those who are ill or disabled living for years on those levels of support and having to jump through hoops of conditionality and facing threats of sanctions, I would not.

Excuses!!

Not everyone is as fortunate as you. You may think we live in a meritocracy and that there is no excuse that everyone can be self reliant, that all you need is a can do attitude. That you have done it so they can too. But despite your life experience that is not everyone's experience.

I could so easily be dependent on benefits if I wanted to. I took stock of myself and worked out what I can do given the limitations I have and just did it.
Yes I agree entirely with PIP - it will remove the sick and ill that 'think' they are disabled just leaving the truly disabled with a source of income.

So you agree with PIP basically doing away with low rate care component.

Do you agree with DLA/PIP being removed as a gateway benefit, for working age claimants ESA and JSA will be the only gateway benefits for things like housing or income support.

I think the result will be more homeless disabled people and more people ending up in hospital or in residential care homes.

Do you agree with PIP having a longer wait period of disability before someone becomes eligible and a longer assessment period with a lower level of benefit, and for many a lower benefit level once assessed.

Do you agree with benefits no longer using medical condition and expert medical evidence from specialists as the primary basis for eligibility, but instead using a twenty minute chat and capability test done by a GP or a nurse.

I believe that a system reliant on weight of expert medical advice from specialists is superior to one based often on a twenty minute chat with someone unqualified to diagnose, give a prognosis or treat the medical condition.

Everyone subject to a few, have the ability to do something with their lives no matter what is wrong with them.

What about the engineer that had always worked on large scale industrial machines - he became incapable of doing that work. What did he do? He went to college to learn how to paint. He now sells his paintings which part way supports him. He is now considering working as a sculptor.

Not everyone has the same abilities or capabilities or opportunities as everyone else. I do not want to see the disabled or ill doing workfare in menial jobs for their benefits. I want them to work if it improves their quality of life and does not harm their health. I would rather offer those with the misfortune to have illnesses or disabilities help that improves their lives and not have a system that threatens them with poverty and destitution, derides them for not trying hard enough to be self sufficient, assumes they are dishonest and lazy and treats them as such.

The last version of the all work test for IB was in my view sufficient. In my view the any work test for ESA requires too high a level of incapablity. The current version of DLA I also think is sufficient even if it is complexed the proposed PIP system looks simplistic by comparison and likely to have people falling through the cracks.

moose1982

I haven't even read most of trastor's responses, because it's so easy to see who they are, so hello AndyFlo :wave:

clemmatis

moose1982 wrote: »

I haven't even read most of trastor's responses, because it's so easy to see who they are, so hello AndyFlo :wave:

AKA grummps -- now PPRd

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showpost.php?p=54940095&postcount=117

but for some reason he's stopped getting posts that out him deleted.

teajug

trastor wrote: »

Utter rubbish!

I worked for one of the largest employer in the country - the Civil Service.

In the last three years of my employment before I retired at 60, I don't think I spent more than 12 months at work. There was never any threat of being 'kicked out', they bent over backwards to help, equipment, flexitime off, part time working etc. I was still paid for all that time.
I saw many disabled people, some very seriously so, that carried on working. It was all about meeting in the middle.

Never once did I see a disabled employee not get what changes they needed.

Ha, Ha, public money, the civil service that says it all, how about a multinational company like the one my granddaughter works for, her employer employs many thousands of people in many countries and they are certainly not disabled friendly. My granddaughter had Access to Work into her place of work for them to make recommendation for her to stay at work. It was a week before the tribunal was due to be heard that her employer got her the equipment that access to work recommended for her 2 years prior to the tribunal. The manager actually told her that they would get her on capabilities grounds eventually.

They would not pay her phase back to work only the hours she worked the employer will looks at every which way to stop any kind of pay from her. No time off for hospital appointments due to her conditions she had to take her holiday leave for that.

Not all disabled people is as lucky as you working in the civil service with the tax payer paying your salary. You should thank your lucky stars that you are not in the private section and you would see how much discrimination there is against disabled people the work place. :mad::mad:

sparkycat2

Don't be silly. My friend has no legs, and he can walk on his pot ones! Of course he is in pain - ever heard of painkillers or just persevering?

Do you want people to be coerced via threat of poverty or destitution in to do things that cause them severe pain, discomfort, distress or causes a deterioration in their health, because of society imposing a obligation on them to be self sufficient regardless of how it effects their quality or life or health.

As for putting up with the risk of dying. How on earth do you think I cope knowing that I have this bloody great inoperable lump inside my chest that is growing and can turn cancerous at any time.

That is hardly the same thing as a specialist telling someone they should not do something because doing so would be likely to result in them doing serious harm, ending up permanently in a wheelchair or in hospital for months or collapsing and dying.

Some people have limited capability that can be overcome via adaptations to the work environment or the job only entailing what they can do or longer training. They can work and be as productive as anyone else. But are more likely to be unemployed and more likely to be unemployed for longer periods than the able because of limited job opportunities and employer discrimination.

But there are lots of people who fall into other groups.

People may be less productive or less reliable or require more supervision due to their medical condition. They are more likely to be unemployed due to their economic viability vs. a able person.

People may have personal care needs that require someone to assist them during the day, or be expected to require a very high level of supervision or at times require urgent assistance or medical assistance. They are in my view pretty unemployable due to the responsibility the employer would need to assume to avoid danger to the employee or the employee basically needing a carer with them.

People may be expected to be or become at times a danger to property or themselves or others. Again I view them as pretty unemployable due to the responsibility the employer would need to assume to avoid danger.

Oh yes the mental side. Currently I am under the care of my CMHT - have been since 1994. They have locked me up and kicked me out. And according to the trick cyclist I should be so heavilly sedated with the drugs he keeps on prescribing that I should be in bed 24/7. What he doesn't know is that I don't take the damn things. Who wants to live like a zombie?

So your answer to side effects is what don't take the medication and don't tell the doctor your not taking the medication? Do you expect people to do that if it makes them more work capable even if it puts their health at greater risk or causes them severe pain.

If the pain is crippling, pain medication is hardly optional.
For others with mental health conditions not taking medication if it results in them being likely to become a danger to themselves or others or being unable to function in society, then not taking the medication is hardly advisable.

How is

I currently receive DLA (HRM & MRC), ESA - in the Support Group for 3 years, Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit - 40% disabled

consistant with

I could so easilly be dependant on benefits if I wanted to.

Why throw more money away. No one has given me any extra to get off my backside, I have done it myself.

You are getting what at least £274.19 a week in disability benefit money and I assume you also receive a pension on grounds of disability from your former employer. The way you talk anyone would think you were severely disabled and self reliant. Not 40% disabled and in receipt of disability benefits including a unemployed disabled benefit ESA.

How on earth do you think your good fortune via understanding employer when you were only at work for 12 months in the last 3 years they employed you, and now your good fortune to be earning money within the permitted work rules, puts you in a position to criticize others on ESA or on DLA. Why do you assume everyone else is more lazy and less deserving than yourself and capable of working. Or do you view yourself as undeserving of the benefits you have received as you are infavour of goverment benefit changes which might have adversely affected you if they had been in effect.

[Deleted User]

If anyone wants to see the Panorama or Dispatches programmes about ATOS assessments they can be found

1) http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01lldrc/Panorama_Disabled_or_Faking_It/

2) http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/4od

I have posted the links in answer to another question in this part of the forum, but they were a bit of an eye opener to me so I thought it appropriate to post them here as well. Hopefully it might allow for some thought before condemning those who fail an ATOS assessment as fraudsters or totally fit to work.

schrodie

It didn't come as a suprise that one Atos trainer's credentials weren't recognised in the UK. So much for the government's assertion and Atos's that HCP are all qualified and members of their professional bodies!!

rogerblack

schrodie wrote: »

It didn't come as a suprise that one Atos trainer's credentials weren't recognised in the UK. So much for the government's assertion and Atos's that HCP are all qualified and members of their professional bodies!!

Qualifications may be perfectly valid, and meaningful, and not be adequate to allow the person to practice in their chosen speciality without essentially going back to school for years to get the proper certificates.

This does not mean they are not qualified.

In many ways, the qualification is pretty much a red herring.
The HCPs are not required to have specific knowledge of the conditions that the claimant has.

This is an unfortunate weakness of the legislation.

The more qualified person may not be the best.

Clearly, if you have a given condition, and happen to be seen by a specialist in that area, that's optimum.

But your average highly skilled cardiac surgeon who is doing some work for ATOS while a hand injury heals may be considerably less familiar with the interplay of mental and physical conditions than some nurses.

Sure, the surgeon would be great if you have a heart issue, but not so much for many other things, as he may be many years away from his training in those fields.

schrodie

rogerblack wrote: »

Qualifications may be perfectly valid, and meaningful, and not be adequate to allow the person to practice in their chosen speciality without essentially going back to school for years to get the proper certificates.

This does not mean they are not qualified.

In many ways, the qualification is pretty much a red herring.
The HCPs are not required to have specific knowledge of the conditions that the claimant has.

If HCPs had to have specific knowledge of the condition the claimant had Atos would have to employ consultants!

HCPs are however supposed to be members of their chosen professional body and then undergo a few weeks training from someone whose own credentials are not recognised by the UK government or medical council or whatever. Only disabled people would be subjected to this kind of behaviour. If this Atos trainer was working in the NHS there may be a few question being asked! Anyway after the revelations that this "trainer" provided e.g. Atos works to targets etc. she may well now be seeking advice from her local JCP!!