£100 lost by not attending ESA appointment

dktreesea

Confuseddot wrote: »

People have died after going to work.

People die thats a fact of life it may be there time or it may be the sanction or it could be the bus that run them over.

Yes, people die while working; working can be dangerous. But they don't kill themselves (usually) out of fear of starvation/homelessness/destitution. Sometimes sanctioning people pushes them over the edge.

dktreesea

nannytone wrote: »

i agree with bogof.
a GP is not the person to assess people for fitness for work.

there is a relationship of trust between a doctor and their patient ( or there should be), for the doctor to have to assess their patients need for state benefits in an honest and impartial way is unfair.

do you honestly think a doctor/patient relationship will remain intact oif the GP refuses them benefit?

But this is a question of competence. A GP is presumably competent to assess a person's mental or physical wellbeing and make a judgement call about whether they should be working or not.


The problem with DWP, and their outsourced providers, like ATOS and the like is that they are using people who are not capable/qualified in many cases of making a medical assessment. Assessing fitness to work should be left to suitably qualified people.

missbiggles1

dktreesea wrote: »

But this is a question of competence. A GP is presumably competent to assess a person's mental or physical wellbeing and make a judgement call about whether they should be working or not.


The problem with DWP, and their outsourced providers, like ATOS and the like is that they are using people who are not capable/qualified in many cases of making a medical assessment. Assessing fitness to work should be left to suitably qualified people.

A doctor may be an expert in the symptoms and treatment of a medical condition but there's no reason why she should understand much about the world of work and how a patients' condition might affect the enormous range of work that includes.

Confuseddot

Alice_Holt wrote: »

My info is from CPAG and I have amended my original post to include a quote and an example from CPAG.

I think it important that this is known, as job-centre staff / work providers may also be unaware of this and give (unwittingly) misleading information to Esa claimants.

That is strange as every other source of information says it won't be reinstated until they have carried out the activity. Perhaps you better contact benefits and work and citizens advice and turn to us etc to let them know they are wrong.

Confuseddot

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, people die while working; working can be dangerous. But they don't kill themselves (usually) out of fear of starvation/homelessness/destitution. Sometimes sanctioning people pushes them over the edge.

No they kill themselves due to stress of having to pay all the bills etc.

Out of the stories that have been reported there is usually help there for the person they just haven't took or there are underlying issues which meant anything could have set them off. I suppose there may be cases out there but the ones that come to the press aren't doing the others any favours.

nannytone_2

dktreesea wrote: »

But this is a question of competence. A GP is presumably competent to assess a person's mental or physical wellbeing and make a judgement call about whether they should be working or not.


The problem with DWP, and their outsourced providers, like ATOS and the like is that they are using people who are not capable/qualified in many cases of making a medical assessment. Assessing fitness to work should be left to suitably qualified people.

a lot of HCP that carry out the WCA are GP's already.

i don't think it is a bad idea at all for fully medically trained people ( rather than OT's, physic's, paramedics etc) to carry out assessments. Just that it's a bad idea to have the claimants own GP doing it

missbiggles1

nannytone wrote: »

a lot of HCP that carry out the WCA are GP's already.

i don't think it is a bad idea at all for fully medically trained people ( rather than OT's, physic's, paramedics etc) to carry out assessments. Just that it's a bad idea to have the claimants own GP doing it

Unless you're talking about retired GPs, that's still going to mean longer waiting times and poorer quality care for those GPs' patients.

I'd actually think a physio or OT's skillset much better suited to do this sort of assessment anyway - OTs, in particular do a lot of work with helping people with disabilities and medical conditions adapt to the workplace and even the other way round.

I also think it's a bit of an insult to say that these professions aren't "fully medically trained".

nannytone_2

they are trained as per their job description ... they are not doctors.
most people would prefer their medical ailments to be assessed by a doctor, rather than a nurse. ( treatment is a different thing, but for diagnosis, i would argue that the majority would prefer a doctor)

to be honest, to get a true picture, the assessor should have more than a cursory knowledge of the claimants illness/disability.
i saw a physio at my WCA, who had never even heard of my condition and i had to explain to her what it was and what caused it.
doesn't instill a high degree of confidence, especially in those less articulate than myself.

the biggest crime is that the actual decision is made by someone with no medical training whatsoever.

SnooksNJ

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, people die while working; working can be dangerous. But they don't kill themselves (usually) out of fear of starvation/homelessness/destitution. Sometimes sanctioning people pushes them over the edge.

So In your estimation DWP's are one in the same as the people who sent millions, including these children, to an "extermination center".

missapril75

SnooksNJ wrote: »

So In your estimation DWP's are one in the same as the people who sent millions, including these children, to an "extermination center".

Hey, that's more than unfair. It was another poster coming out with that nonsense.
dktreesea only backed the one point made about the deaths that might have been avoided with different procedures/attitudes (or might have been triggered by something else) and actually posted comments sympathetic to DWP staff as well as benefit recipients.