Benefits Street

[Captain...]

His comments were clearly indicated he feels this is fine, no one should be bothered, we should all ignore it, he even managed to end it with a go at the people probably pay his benefits, you couldn't make it up.

 

 

Well you clearly made it up, you have made up that he is on benefits  he is clearly questioning why this one issue and program gets people so mad, when it is a very small problem compared to the massive waste by the Government on things like the NHS computer system, and the fact that big employers aren't paying a living wage. At no point does he say that we should ignore it, he says it is not ideal, but not representative of the true problem with benefits, ie that more of it is claimed by people with jobs than without.

 

I really don't know what you read, but it isn't the same thing I did.

[Guest MattP]

Well you clearly made it up, you have made up that he is on benefits  he is clearly questioning why this one issue and program gets people so mad, when it is a very small problem compared to the massive waste by the Government on things like the NHS computer system, and the fact that big employers aren't paying a living wage. At no point does he say that we should ignore it, he says it is not ideal, but not representative of the true problem with benefits, ie that more of it is claimed by people with jobs than without.

 

I really don't know what you read, but it isn't the same thing I did.

 

I read yet again someone trying to divert attention away from the actual issues here.

 

It's either bankers, landlords, homeless, blah blah blah and this time it was the NHS computer system, yes it was a terrible waste of money, but then again what wasn't that was implemented by the last Labour government?

 

It's more excuses, we don't want to tackle this so we'll divert your eyes and blame something else that cost even more money, I suppose we can now though avoid a row about the computer system by pointing to Trident or something.

[Guest MattP]

This is a worthwhile petition. It will make the way ATOS work more efficient fairer to those being assessed and save money with less appeals going to court.

 

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/47554

 

All Vulnerable Groups in society including: ALL MENTALLY ILL, LEARNING DISABLED, AUTISTIC, BLIND, EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE PERSONALITY DISORDERS, DISABLED & ALL others deemed 'VULNERABLE'.

 

lol

 

I wonder who will be in charge of judging that

[Jon the Hat]

All Vulnerable Groups in society including: ALL MENTALLY ILL, LEARNING DISABLED, AUTISTIC, BLIND, EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE PERSONALITY DISORDERS, DISABLED & ALL others deemed 'VULNERABLE'.

 

lol

 

I wonder who will be in charge of judging that

 

IPSA should be very capable wit their MP expenses expertise.

[Captain...]

I read yet again someone trying to divert attention away from the actual issues here.

 

It's either bankers, landlords, homeless, blah blah blah and this time it was the NHS computer system, yes it was a terrible waste of money, but then again what wasn't that was implemented by the last Labour government?

 

It's more excuses, we don't want to tackle this so we'll divert your eyes and blame something else that cost even more money, I suppose we can now though avoid a row about the computer system by pointing to Trident or something.

 

There is more than one issue at the moment, and "scroungers" is probably not the biggest, but just because you have your benefits blinkers on, doesn't mean you can call someone a disgrace for not seeing it as important as you.

 

The truth is this will blow over at some point as something else attracts the rage of the general public and distracts from the real issues, it wasn't so long ago that Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants were coming here to destroy our way of life, then it was the imminent threat of Sharia Law and terrorist attacks, before that Gays getting married, and after each bout of public moral outrage, fierce debate and proclamations of the end of the world, nothing actually changes, we'll be back round to immigrants soon enough, or the NHS, or education.

 

A cynic might suggest we are drip fed bogey men to keep us distracted from looking to hard at the bigger picture...

[Dr The Singh]

All Vulnerable Groups in society including: ALL MENTALLY ILL, LEARNING DISABLED, AUTISTIC, BLIND, EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE PERSONALITY DISORDERS, DISABLED & ALL others deemed 'VULNERABLE'.

 

lol

 

I wonder who will be in charge of judging that

In your company Matt, I feel vunerable!!!

[Guest MattP]

I was deemed vulnerable on Sunday, how much do I get?     

[Guest MattP]

There is more than one issue at the moment, and "scroungers" is probably not the biggest, but just because you have your benefits blinkers on, doesn't mean you can call someone a disgrace for not seeing it as important as you.

 

The truth is this will blow over at some point as something else attracts the rage of the general public and distracts from the real issues, it wasn't so long ago that Bulgarian and Romanian immigrants were coming here to destroy our way of life, then it was the imminent threat of Sharia Law and terrorist attacks, before that Gays getting married, and after each bout of public moral outrage, fierce debate and proclamations of the end of the world, nothing actually changes, we'll be back round to immigrants soon enough, or the NHS, or education.

 

A cynic might suggest we are drip fed bogey men to keep us distracted from looking to hard at the bigger picture...

 

Wouldn't disagree with you there, although I never feared half the things you mentioned in that.

 

A cynic from a different angle would say some politicians and people seek to play down what certain groups do as it keeps themselves in a good position in whatever they do in life.

 

I mean if I was a Labour member, relying on these peoples votes or making money from writing about how demonised they are I'm sure I'd be defending these people.

[Captain...]

Wouldn't disagree with you there, although I never feared half the things you mentioned in that.

 

A cynic from a different angle would say some politicians and people seek to play down what certain groups do as it keeps themselves in a good position in whatever they do in life.

 

I mean if I was a Labour member, relying on these peoples votes or making money from writing about how demonised they are I'm sure I'd be defending these people.

 

You might say that politics is fvcked on both sides at the moment, and has been for quite a while.

[Rincewind]

GPs dont want that responsibility so that is not easy to achieve.  You could also argue that it would be very expensive to take it off assessors who are paid little and give it to GPs who are paid a lot.

ATM it is costing a hell of a lot more with all the appeals going to court. All it would take is a small form with a couple of questions that the patient can take to their GP on one of their regular visits. Two minute job. It will cut down the queues at the assessment centres relieve the busy staff and save thousands of cases going to the appeal court and thousands being paid out in hardship payments.

 

I would have thought that it was already done. What medical experience do the assessors have? If the number of successful appeals is anything to go by not a lot. They are there  to do a job for the Government.

[Guest MattP]

ATM it is costing a hell a lot more with all the appeals going to ourt. All it would take is a small form with a couple of questions that the patient can take to their GP on one of ther regular visits. Two minute job. It will cut down the queues at the assessment centres relieve the busy staff and save thousands of cases going to the appeal court and thousands being paid out in hardship payments.

 

It's not about cost it's about getting it fair and right. With the amount of disabled we'd have in your society I don't think a GP would get a spare minute in 24 hours even if it was a "two minute job".

 

We need a cull of the disabled really or we'll have millions of them in 20 years living without anything and the genuine cases won't even be able to get funding, the numbers are reaching staggering levels and if Miliband gets to power they'll probably end up outnumbering normal folk when things like baldness start becoming disabilities to expand their voting base.

 

It's tough times ahead and some serious decisions have to be made.

 

What was a great shame was paralympic funding being cut yesterday, the ones who actually want to get out and live a normal life are now going to be punished because loads of people are desperate to defend White Dee as "disabled" and she needs her Ipad, sky tv and fags from the countfries bank account.

 

It's a sick society.

[Guest MattP]

Can you imagine being in the shoes of Tanni Grey Thompson today, no legs and your funding is cut despite bringing joy to people through your talent and hard work because people like White Dee need more handouts for a pack of Embassy?

 

They must be more angry about it then any normal working tax payer.

[Jon the Hat]

ATM it is costing a hell of a lot more with all the appeals going to court. All it would take is a small form with a couple of questions that the patient can take to their GP on one of their regular visits. Two minute job. It will cut down the queues at the assessment centres relieve the busy staff and save thousands of cases going to the appeal court and thousands being paid out in hardship payments.

 

GP's wont agree to do it.  It is not their job to asses people for benefit entitlement.  You have to come with workable solutions.

[The Don]

I was turning the tables. The JC is a depressing place. I wanted to get out asap. The staff have targets to meet with sanctioning and quite a few of them dread going in to work and say they have to leave empathy behind. They want to help but are just puppets in the system.

I'm glad the JC is a depressing place - surely you dont want return visitors?

[Rincewind]

GP's wont agree to do it.  It is not their job to asses people for benefit entitlement.  You have to come with workable solutions.

They do it anyway when giving out sick notes. they are not assessing the right to benefit payments but whether they are fit for work. If a patient has a heart defect they will know best whether a physical job will have an effect on the ability to do it and if a person has bladder or walking problem they will be best qualified to say how long a person can move sit or anything else. Common sense.

[Jon the Hat]

They do it anyway when giving out sick notes. they are not assessing the right to benefit payments but whether they are fit for work. If a patient has a heart defect they will know best whether a physical job will have an effect on the ability to do it and if a person has bladder or walking problem they will be best qualified to say how long a person can move sit or anything else. Common sense.

 

Are you listening Ken?  They wont do it, they have said they won't do it, and the government are not about to force them to do it.  It is not their job, they are not best placed to assess just becuase they happen to be in general medicine, they have little knowledge of the demands of specific jobs, and are not equiped to assess capability to work.

[Merging Cultures]

What about a simple online questionnaire that the GP fills out about the patient. The benefits/job center can do an assessment of the person's capacity and suitability for types of work, then the GP just fills out a simple form that through the magic of the internet is specific enough for the type of work the person has been assessed as having the ability to do.

 

E.g. Job Center assesses White Dee. Does she have a degree? No. Does she have any qualifications? Some. Is she computer literate? No. Can she follow basic instructions? Yes. = She can do manual tasks like shelf stocking, working on a till, or packing bags at Sainsbury's. Then a computer matches the physical requirements needed for those jobs. Standing up for 2 hours straight between breaks, bending over and lifting more than 15lbs, mental capacity to add up. The GP then ticks those boxes. 

 

That way the GP doesn't need to assess her based on different requirements for jobs, he's just filling out a form based on what the job center has assessed her as capable of doing.

[Captain...]

Are you listening Ken?  They wont do it, they have said they won't do it, and the government are not about to force them to do it.  It is not their job, they are not best placed to assess just becuase they happen to be in general medicine, they have little knowledge of the demands of specific jobs, and are not equiped to assess capability to work.

 

Aren't they employed by the Government, so don't really have the right to say they won't do it? Surely they do this every day when signing people off on short term sick, and have been doing it for years before ATOS. If someone is registered disabled, then surely they will be seeing them on a regular basis. Of course they don't know the ins and outs of every job, but they have to be better able to assess someone's health than people at ATOS. Are ATOS assessors medically qualified? Do they have knowledge of the demands of specific jobs that doctors don't?

 

The only reason I can see for outsourcing this assessment to a private company is that they can be financially rewarded/motivated in finding people fit to work and getting them off benefits, but as Ken has pointed out, this has resulted in a number of cases being overturned on appeal, at tax payers expense, and has been directly responsible for people dying. It is shocking and indefensible. Is that worth marginally reducing the benefits bill?

[Jon the Hat]

Dont get me wrong, the ATOS performance has been shockingly bad.  40% appeal success is complete failure.  That doesnt mean pushing it back to GPs is the answer, clearly there is a significant re-calibration required to their approach.

[Rincewind]

From what I have been told by people that have been tested the assessments consist of raising one arm then the other above the head and walking ten paces. This will not determine the persons heart condition or long term standing or lifting heavy objects. People have been told they are OK for work thought 'oh great back to work' then found the job they applied for too physically demanding. They cannot pack it in as they will be barred from receiving benefits so carry on sometimes resulting in strokes.

Someone should be at hand to see the persons medical file and base their judgement on medical grounds rather than whether they can lift an empty box up which is what a mate of mine had to do. He said of course I can lift it it there is nothing in it, fill it with something and I will struggle.

[Jon the Hat]

From what I have been told by people that have been tested the assessments consist of raising one arm then the other above the head and walking ten paces. This will not determine the persons heart condition or long term standing or lifting heavy objects. People have been told they are OK for work thought 'oh great back to work' then found the job they applied for too physically demanding. They cannot pack it in as they will be barred from receiving benefits so carry on sometimes resulting in strokes.

Someone should be at hand to see the persons medical file and base their judgement on medical grounds rather than whether they can lift an empty box up which is what a mate of mine had to do. He said of course I can lift it it there is nothing in it, fill it with something and I will struggle.

 

Thousands of them I bet! 

[Rincewind]

or other reason

[Jon the Hat]

or other reason

 

You are making it sound far simpler than it is.  Your logic goes:

 

1) Someone says they cannot work

2) ATOS shoudl assess them and agree they are not fit to work on the say so of the individual who is incentivised not to work.

3) Benefits continue to be paid.

 

This assumes that people are not lying or exaggerating their lack of capability.  That is a huge assumption to make.

[Captain...]

You are making it sound far simpler than it is.  Your logic goes:

 

1) Someone says they cannot work

2) ATOS shoudl assess them and agree they are not fit to work on the say so of the individual who is incentivised not to work.

3) Benefits continue to be paid.

 

This assumes that people are not lying or exaggerating their lack of capability.  That is a huge assumption to make.

 

But it is not the people saying that they cannot work, it has generally been people assessed and signed off by doctors as not being fit to work, being on disability for years, then all of a sudden being told that they have to go back to work. There have been cases of suicide after receiving the ATOS verdict.

 

People physically able to work, aren't always mentally strong enough to cope with work, imagine you have ended up seriously depressed due to your job, you get signed off by your doctor, because it was detrimental to your mental well being. A few years later you get ATOS telling you you have to find a job and your benefits are being stopped. That could cause the on set of serious depression, and has in at least oen case I've seen led to someone taking their life.

 

I would also like to know what support and help is offered to these people in getting a job, the impression is that ATOS declare you fit, your benefits get stopped and you have to find a job, surely there should be some sort of back to work program, if people have been off for a while they may not be in a position to find a job, and may require integrating back into the work place slowly. Maybe that is just my wooly liberal thinking.

[FoxyPV]

If the BMC shouts 'Jump', the govt asks 'how high?'

 

There should be more rigour in signing people off on the sick but when you have people who know how to play the system (don't show or shave etc for a week or two beforehand, wear dirty clothes and gabble incoherently) the GPs don't have much of a chance.