Mental Health Claimants - Questions asked at ESA and PIP medicals

Bogalot

Savile wrote: »

The problem is as was said the other day, A Illness can get better a Disability will not, if you have a Illness you should not receive DLA/PIP that should be for people with disability's and illness that will not get better or controlled. If we all started to think like that the country would save a fortune, people would be more keen to get better and back to work because they would need the money, Instead we have made a culture of people who think the deserve to get the same amount in benefits as somebody working and not be answerable to anybody and just want to be left alone. Bring in more checks I say.

Not sure where you've got that definition from, some disabilities do "get better" and some do not. Cancer is a disability, thankfully many people make a full recovery from it. Mental health conditions can amount to a disability, depending on severity and long term prognosis.

Probably best we don't all start to think like that, because it makes no sense

Tolly_T

The problem is as was said the other day, A Illness can get better a Disability will not, if you have a Illness you should not receive DLA/PIP that should be for people with disability's and illness that will not get better or controlled.

PIP already takes account of if an illness will get better and if it can be controlled. The requirements are that the condition has existed for 3 months and is expected to last for another 9 months. Many severe mental illnesses last decades/a lifetime and are not well controlled.

If we all started to think like that the country would save a fortune, people would be more keen to get better and back to work because they would need the money

Do you really believe that people with severe illnesses will get better because they are 'keen' to get better? Your comment shows naivety. Treatments aren't that good and just wanting to get better doesn't help that much, it's a start but nothing more. Unless you're talking about the people who are lying and exaggerating (we shouldn't confuse the two groups) in which case I agree, "bring in more checks", but make sure they're checks that work, not the checks that they have now which aren't fit for purpose.

I worked in a day centre for people with severe mental illness for a few years and the idea that an employer would have given any one of the clients a job is pushing it. The idea that they would have been able to hold down a job if they were able to get one is ridiculous. Maybe your comments stem from a lack of experience. Unless you spend a significant amount of time with people with different illnesses/disability it's hard to understand the impact that they each can have on a person's life.

GlasweJen

What about conditions where no one knows? I have a condition so rare they think I'm the only person in the EU with it, no one knows how it will progress and I might get up tomorrow and never have walking problems again. Should I be denied benefits because of that?

missbiggles1

Tolly_T wrote: »

PIP already takes account of if an illness will get better and if it can be controlled. The requirements are that the condition has existed for 3 months and is expected to last for another 9 months. Many severe mental illnesses last decades/a lifetime and are not well controlled.



Do you really believe that people with severe illnesses will get better because they are 'keen' to get better? Your comment shows naivety. Treatments aren't that good and just wanting to get better doesn't help that much, it's a start but nothing more. Unless you're talking about the people who are lying and exaggerating (we shouldn't confuse the two groups) in which case I agree, "bring in more checks", but make sure they're checks that work, not the checks that they have now which aren't fit for purpose.

I worked in a day centre for people with severe mental illness for a few years and the idea that an employer would have given any one of the clients a job is pushing it. The idea that they would have been able to hold down a job if they were able to get one is ridiculous. Maybe your comments stem from a lack of experience. Unless you spend a significant amount of time with people with different illnesses/disability it's hard to understand the impact that they each can have on a person's life.

I've worked with people with mental illness who claimed disability benefits who would have been able to work if they had had financial motivation, so there are people who fall into that category who aren't fakers.

I returned to work myself after taking early retirement because of stress and depression and became enormously better off - if I'd been claiming benefits and hadn't been any better off, I'm not sure how much of an effort I would've made.

paragon909

As Judge Judy says, "If you tell the truth you dont need to have a good memory"

AuronGrande

I'm currently getting both ESA and PIP. On both accounts, I always end up going through Tribunal.
Whenever I get a copy of the medical assessments it always reads like fiction. Made up results, questions not asked but filled out and certainly little or no mention of my disability that causes me to have seizures. I've had a seizure in a PIP exam and there was no mention of it in the medical report. I had a seizure at an ESA exam and the staff told my mum that she had to move me because I was causing a Health & Safety risk.
Because my seizures can vary from 4 times in a single hour every couple of days to once every few months, the DWP always states that I only have seizures once every few months at most, which means I don't qualify.
It's when I go to Tribunal that I'm awarded the benefits. It's a never ending cycle.

Tolly_T

I've worked with people with mental illness who claimed disability benefits who would have been able to work if they had had financial motivation, so there are people who fall into that category who aren't fakers.

If they were claiming ESA then we clearly view this differently. From what you say it sounds like these were people who had an illness, were able to work with this illness, but chose not to because they'd rather claim benefits and there wasn't enough financial motivation for them to work. If they were claiming ESA and stating that they were not fit to work, but in reality could have worked, they were surely lying or exaggerating their symptoms. I think these are fakers. Not faking the illness but faking the impact of their illness. I'm not including PIP in this as that is for people in or out of work and I don't believe a person being able to work should be used to refuse PIP, there's far more to be considered before making a decision.

The people I worked with weren't in this situation. They were very unstable, in and out of hospital often with stays of months at a time on section. Very few employers would be able to work around that and it's unlikely that they would have got through a probationary period. Some of these claimants were found fit for work. Ridiculous decisions knowing the people concerned but it is hard to assess in a short time and they must have been seen on a very good day or simply not believed. Fortunately while I was there they were all given the benefit at MR and didn't have to go to a tribunal.

missbiggles1

Tolly_T wrote: »

If they were claiming ESA then we clearly view this differently. From what you say it sounds like these were people who had an illness, were able to work with this illness, but chose not to because they'd rather claim benefits and there wasn't enough financial motivation for them to work. If they were claiming ESA and stating that they were not fit to work, but in reality could have worked, they were surely lying or exaggerating their symptoms. I think these are fakers. Not faking the illness but faking the impact of their illness. I'm not including PIP in this as that is for people in or out of work and I don't believe a person being able to work should be used to refuse PIP, there's far more to be considered before making a decision.

The people I worked with weren't in this situation. They were very unstable, in and out of hospital often with stays of months at a time on section. Very few employers would be able to work around that and it's unlikely that they would have got through a probationary period. Some of these claimants were found fit for work. Ridiculous decisions knowing the people concerned but it is hard to assess in a short time and they must have been seen on a very good day or simply not believed. Fortunately while I was there they were all given the benefit at MR and didn't have to go to a tribunal.

I appreciate that you're talking about severe mental illness and I'm not but not all mental illness is as extreme as you've experienced.

There is a level of mental illness where people may genuinely believe that they can't work and don't put themselves to the test on it because there's little financial incentive to do so. I don't think that makes them liars or fakers but neither do I think that they should be allowed to remain on benefits for many years, otherwise they can become unemployable, even if they weren't before.

Bananas123

it's a completely random process, where you see a completely random person who may or may not be trained or know anything about your conditions.

(i.e. you could see someone who has training, who allocates you into the correct group OR you can see a complete !!!!!! who lies instead of doing work)

the unfortunate thing is that (referring to bracketing), that inorder to do the job properly, is dependant on the hcp entirely, i.e. you could get a failed physiotherapist assessing your mental health problems.

(this is unfortunate also, as trained people can secure much much more income, in alterante work positions, and there is no insentive for them to work as a HCP anyway).

in summary, you can't really plan for the unexpected.

---

the unfortunate thing on these forums, is that you get a lot of bias DWP people, who don't know what they are talking about.

i was a cleaner for the DWP for many years prior to having to end work due to mental and physical illness.

some of the dumb !!!!s cannot even get rubbish from their hand into the bin..... i wouldn't listen to these people personally, as someone with servere mental health problems who has been through the process.

belinda1960

Principally interested in claimants who have had ESA or PIP medicals and who suffer with clinical depression and/or bi-polar disorder.

I understand that clinical depression is treated more favourably by HCP's because it is less variable.