Chemotherapy - cancer? You're fit.

[Willy Nilly]

My friend has a brain tumour, she has finally admitted defeat and given up work. She was working part time but can't really do much now. Poor thing. People that try it on should go and see her to see what it is like to be really poorly.

[Sticks.]

andymadmak said:

Yes, there is a dynamic in the appeals process that has yet to be fully explored. A 40% success rate suggests that 40% of assessments are wrong.. However earlier in this thread there was evidence to suggest that some appeals "specialists" could achieve a 100% success rate, which would in turn suggest that at least some of that 40% is down not to incorrect assessments but to the ability of the specialist appeals bods to manipulate the system to their clients advantage.

I take your point, but the flip side is that being paid by results also brings into question the companies employed to do the assessments. Imho 20% would be high, but I suspect we'll never know the 'right' number.

[69 coupe]

It seems to me Claimants & Disability organisations are very weary of the contracts that have been awarded to undertake these IB medicals the quality & some say target nature of the system with either trained Doctors or trained Health Professionals where the advice of the claimants Doctors are secondary. ATOS are a French i.t company with this contract.

Up to 1 Billion of new contracts are up for grabs in regards DLA to PIP the big winner again is ATOS, with Capita winning a smaller tranche, personally i'm not to enamored with these type of awards to essentially i.t services companies, Capita do Congestion Charging, TV licencing & CRB checks among other Gov contracts, G4S, Reed in Partnership & Serco are all in the running for other Lots.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/we...

[crankedup]

andymadmak said:

crankedup said:

Oakey said:

Do you really think he's going to be deemed fit for work?

No he will not be deemed fit for work. But you try telling him that. He is irrational through illness.

So the problem is not that the assessment process - a process which you concede would not change his status, but rather your brothers irrational interpretation of it...... How is any change supposed to be made then, if the irrational are going to constantly missinterpret what is being put forward?

I'm sure that thousands of other people present illness in a multitude of ways, and the understanding of those presentations open to all sorts of people. Some will be experienced and have some understanding of the medical conditions, whilst others will want to form opinions over the internet. In my Bro's case, his medical condition takes him into places that lay persons could not understand, including me. It is what an illness such as a inoperable brain tumour can inflict.
Also the problem is within the assessment process, catch the information on Iplayer if your interest is that strong.

[crankedup]

Willy Nilly said:

My friend has a brain tumour, she has finally admitted defeat and given up work. She was working part time but can't really do much now. Poor thing. People that try it on should go and see her to see what it is like to be really poorly.

Indeed, its not something to be made light of. Until people experience the shattering effect upon a family member or close friend it is almost impossible for those to form a valid opinion. Medical profession excluded. Hope your friend responds well to treatment.

[Rude-boy]

davepoth said:

If you are intending to cheat the benefit system, you will have read up on this to make sure you get the necessary points. However if you are honest and haven't come into contact with the benefits system before you may try and downplay how ill you are, which runs the risk of declaring you fit for work when you may not be.

Bang on.

An old friend has been going down hill for a long period of time (15+ years) very slowly. Today they might be able to walk half a mile with a friend, tomorrow they not only might not be able to walk further than the bathroom but also be mentally unable to leave their home.

One truthful answer after a week of (for them) good health took over six months to rectify and cost them not only a considerable to them chunck of money but also had a noticable negative effect on their health to the point I have never since seen them as well as they were the day they filled that form in...

There will always be people like my friend, there will always be people with 'a bad back' who are milking it for all it is worth.

Omelettes and eggs.

[crankedup]

69 coupe said:

It seems to me Claimants & Disability organisations are very weary of the contracts that have been awarded to undertake these IB medicals the quality & some say target nature of the system with either trained Doctors or trained Health Professionals where the advice of the claimants Doctors are secondary. ATOS are a French i.t company with this contract.

Up to 1 Billion of new contracts are up for grabs in regards DLA to PIP the big winner again is ATOS, with Capita winning a smaller tranche, personally i'm not to enamored with these type of awards to essentially i.t services companies, Capita do Congestion Charging, TV licencing & CRB checks among other Gov contracts, G4S, Reed in Partnership & Serco are all in the running for other Lots.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/we...

The assessment form is box ticking only, no room for medical opinion. This is one of the most doubtful procedures and given the magnitude of an outcome and its possible effect upon a patient,its patently flawed, unreasonable and unfair.

[andymadmak]

crankedup said:

The assessment form is box ticking only, no room for medical opinion. This is one of the most doubtful procedures and given the magnitude of an outcome and its possible effect upon a patient,its patently flawed, unreasonable and unfair.

Do you have any workable suggestions for improvements? To criticise is easy and all that..

[crankedup]

andymadmak said:

crankedup said:

The assessment form is box ticking only, no room for medical opinion. This is one of the most doubtful procedures and given the magnitude of an outcome and its possible effect upon a patient,its patently flawed, unreasonable and unfair.

Do you have any workable suggestions for improvements? To criticise is easy and all that..

Yes I do, bring together a Committee of medical experts from the various specialists fields of work. Sit them down and ask them the value of the current assessment form in relation to identifying the genuinely ill/disabled who are extremely unlikely to be able to work. Unfortunately the Government is refusing to carry out such a re-assessment of the current system, despite growing evidence of the deep flaws that exist. To remove the idiotic box ticking and replace that with medical opinion would be a good place to start. When it is heard that even some of the assessors are embarrassed by not being able to score a patient correctly, because the form requirements are flawed, we know a major problem exists.

[Murph7355]

crankedup said:

Yes I do, bring together a Committee of medical experts from the various specialists fields of work. Sit them down and ask them the value of the current assessment form in relation to identifying the genuinely ill/disabled who are extremely unlikely to be able to work. Unfortunately the Government is refusing to carry out such a re-assessment of the current system, despite growing evidence of the deep flaws that exist. To remove the idiotic box ticking and replace that with medical opinion would be a good place to start. When it is heard that even some of the assessors are embarrassed by not being able to score a patient correctly, because the form requirements are flawed, we know a major problem exists.

Maybe someone's assessed that the cost of revisiting the procedure would outweigh any net:net "benefit" in the cost of the benefit overall, and hence they've decided to look at other things instead?

Of course there is the argument that these things should not be all about the finances. But that's relatively easy to say when one doesn't have to worry about funding it unfortunately. We have to face up to the fact that the expenditure pot is finite and there are many worthy calls on that pot.

(Of course it may just be that the bureaucrats can't be arsed - which I suspect is likely the case with many of our outmoded processes and benefits. In which case the only real recourse we have is writing to MPs and not voting for them...though I would guess this sort of thing isn't new).

[davepoth]

Who is going to review the medical opinions? You would need doctors to do that. They are very, very, very expensive. I imagine that's why they only get involved at the appeal stage.

[crankedup]

Revisit my old thread for the benefit of Andymadmack.