The Student Room Group

Yet another example of Tory supported ESA test not working.

http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/mp-gp-slam-benefits-assessors-7920519

Conservatives and their austerity supporters are getting constantly upset that their policies are not working.

Read the following article how a qualified Doctor says that a patient should of scored 45 points on the ESA test yet the patient who is mentally ill scored nothing.

Disabled & Sick people are being denied support purely based on ideological austerity reasons.

You might think that Disabled people should just suck it up and get a job. Well everyone is entitled to an opinion but just think if you become disabled, ill & sick one day and you are unable to do your job. Are you going to just suck it up and carry on working or are you going to collapse and go into free fall.

Its perfectly okay when it is someone else suffering but when your suffering it could be a different matter right?

Think about it before you leave a comment.
(edited 9 years ago)
That spokesperson in the article is talking a whole lot of nonsense. The tests aren't designed to look at what work people can do with the right support. If someone doesn't score 15 points or more, their money is stopped. Often, the first they know about this is when their money isn't in the bank on the day it should be. Then there's the choice - which isn't really a choice if your health doesn't permit you to work - claim JSA (and declare yourself fit to work), or appeal. At no stage in this process does anyone analyse what type of work someone might be able to do. At no stage is there an offer of support.

Appeals are a difficult process. People can be left without any money for months on end. How this is supposed to help their mental and physical health, I don't know. I have helped people with appeals and witnessed the deterioration of their health during the half a year or more that it tends to take to sort things. One man was given zero points by the assessor, who blatantly lied in her report and overlooked all the medical evidence. He was in such a state mentally, that he was unable to complete the appeal, so I was allowed to pursue it for him. By the end, he was ready to give up on life. Thankfully, his appeal was accepted and he was placed back in the Support Group, where he should have been all along. Unfortunately, his condition was a whole lot worse than it had been before the assessment.

Personally, I feel that the current process is unlawful because it's causing harm to people. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any assessments, but the current process isn't fit for purpose. We need assessments that are humane, that are based on solid medical evidence, and that are actually designed to help and support people.
Original post by Kittiara
That spokesperson in the article is talking a whole lot of nonsense. The tests aren't designed to look at what work people can do with the right support. If someone doesn't score 15 points or more, their money is stopped. Often, the first they know about this is when their money isn't in the bank on the day it should be. Then there's the choice - which isn't really a choice if your health doesn't permit you to work - claim JSA (and declare yourself fit to work), or appeal. At no stage in this process does anyone analyse what type of work someone might be able to do. At no stage is there an offer of support.

Appeals are a difficult process. People can be left without any money for months on end. How this is supposed to help their mental and physical health, I don't know. I have helped people with appeals and witnessed the deterioration of their health during the half a year or more that it tends to take to sort things. One man was given zero points by the assessor, who blatantly lied in her report and overlooked all the medical evidence. He was in such a state mentally, that he was unable to complete the appeal, so I was allowed to pursue it for him. By the end, he was ready to give up on life. Thankfully, his appeal was accepted and he was placed back in the Support Group, where he should have been all along. Unfortunately, his condition was a whole lot worse than it had been before the assessment.

Personally, I feel that the current process is unlawful because it's causing harm to people. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any assessments, but the current process isn't fit for purpose. We need assessments that are humane, that are based on solid medical evidence, and that are actually designed to help and support people.


You speak a lot of sense but the Tories on this forum will call you a scrounger supporter. I get it directed at me all the time. In fact they have gone as low to say I am the kind of person who stops disabled people from getting a job. They declare that people like ourselves encourage people towards a life of dependency.
(edited 9 years ago)
Original post by illegaltobepoor
You speak a lot of sense but the Tories on this forum will call you a scrounger supporter. I get it directed at me all the time. In fact they have gone as low to say I am the kind of person who stops disabled people from getting a job. They declare that people like ourselves encourage people towards a life of dependency.


Try making the points I'm making in national newspapers :biggrin:. I've been called all sorts. Even received death threats. So, I'm used to it.

What's stopping people with disabilities who are capable of some work getting a job is a lack of support and a lack of employers who are willing or able to accommodate individual needs. It's very much an employers' market right now, and there are plenty of people without physical and mental health problems looking for pretty much any job available. People with disabilities and health problems, then, aren't high on the list for those in charge of recruitment.

I would be a big fan of a system that helped people with disabilities and physical/ mental health problems who are capable of work find suitable employment. Such a system would help people discover what work they are capable of. It would not just take into consideration what they are mentally and physically capable of, but also their skills, talents and interests.

Some people might need retraining. For example, an IT specialist who has been out of work for a while might require a top-up course to bring them up to date, or someone who used to do manual labour, yet can no longer do so, will need to find a new career. Online courses might come in handy, especially for people dealing with anxiety or social phobia - combined with therapy this could make a big difference.

Smaller businesses/non-profit organisations could be offered financial assistance to help support the individual needs of employees with disabilities. Huge companies making lots of profit should be able to afford this themselves. However, those companies might still be more tempted to hire people who need more support if they have fresh qualifications in their pocket.

Yes, it would take some investment, but the current set-up is costing us hundreds of millions every year and is not at all effective. I would rather see that money be spent on education and genuinely helpful support.

People with disabilities and physical and mental health problems who cannot undertake any work but who may be able to return to work at some point, could also be offered courses (without any pressure, of course - it should be voluntary), and those who cannot undertake work and will not be able to undertake work in the future shouldn't be hassled at all.

Sorry for the lengthy posts - this is something I am passionate about :colondollar:.
Original post by Kittiara
Try making the points I'm making in national newspapers :biggrin:. I've been called all sorts. Even received death threats. So, I'm used to it.

What's stopping people with disabilities who are capable of some work getting a job is a lack of support and a lack of employers who are willing or able to accommodate individual needs. It's very much an employers' market right now, and there are plenty of people without physical and mental health problems looking for pretty much any job available. People with disabilities and health problems, then, aren't high on the list for those in charge of recruitment.

I would be a big fan of a system that helped people with disabilities and physical/ mental health problems who are capable of work find suitable employment. Such a system would help people discover what work they are capable of. It would not just take into consideration what they are mentally and physically capable of, but also their skills, talents and interests.

Some people might need retraining. For example, an IT specialist who has been out of work for a while might require a top-up course to bring them up to date, or someone who used to do manual labour, yet can no longer do so, will need to find a new career. Online courses might come in handy, especially for people dealing with anxiety or social phobia - combined with therapy this could make a big difference.

Smaller businesses/non-profit organisations could be offered financial assistance to help support the individual needs of employees with disabilities. Huge companies making lots of profit should be able to afford this themselves. However, those companies might still be more tempted to hire people who need more support if they have fresh qualifications in their pocket.

Yes, it would take some investment, but the current set-up is costing us hundreds of millions every year and is not at all effective. I would rather see that money be spent on education and genuinely helpful support.

People with disabilities and physical and mental health problems who cannot undertake any work but who may be able to return to work at some point, could also be offered courses (without any pressure, of course - it should be voluntary), and those who cannot undertake work and will not be able to undertake work in the future shouldn't be hassled at all.

Sorry for the lengthy posts - this is something I am passionate about :colondollar:.


I have pretty serious Autism but I later found out that my Sociopath personality is excellent in the finance industry. The only problem I have is raging when I loose money. And I do seriously rage. I've smashed in screens and chucked a desktop computer down the stairs.
Reply 5
Original post by illegaltobepoor
http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/mp-gp-slam-benefits-assessors-7920519

Conservatives and their austerity supporters are getting constantly upset that their policies are not working.

Read the following article how a qualified Doctor says that a patient should of scored 45 points on the ESA test yet the patient who is mentally ill scored nothing.


Well, either the doctor is right and it is in fact simply an error, or he is wrong and the process was correct.

In neither case is it ideological. If it is an error, fine. You'll find that, in assessing thousands of people, that will happen occasionally.
Reply 6
Original post by Kittiara
I would be a big fan of a system that helped people with disabilities and physical/ mental health problems who are capable of work find suitable employment. Such a system would help people discover what work they are capable of. It would not just take into consideration what they are mentally and physically capable of, but also their skills, talents and interests.

Some people might need retraining. For example, an IT specialist who has been out of work for a while might require a top-up course to bring them up to date, or someone who used to do manual labour, yet can no longer do so, will need to find a new career. Online courses might come in handy, especially for people dealing with anxiety or social phobia - combined with therapy this could make a big difference.

Smaller businesses/non-profit organisations could be offered financial assistance to help support the individual needs of employees with disabilities. Huge companies making lots of profit should be able to afford this themselves. However, those companies might still be more tempted to hire people who need more support if they have fresh qualifications in their pocket.

Yes, it would take some investment, but the current set-up is costing us hundreds of millions every year and is not at all effective. I would rather see that money be spent on education and genuinely helpful support..


The Government already does most of these things.
Original post by illegaltobepoor
I have pretty serious Autism but I later found out that my Sociopath personality is excellent in the finance industry. The only problem I have is raging when I loose money. And I do seriously rage. I've smashed in screens and chucked a desktop computer down the stairs.


Is that something you can try to manage? Place a punchbag in your office and direct the anger towards it, for example?

I have issues with authority. I'm not a criminal or a troublemaker, but in order for me to accept authority, I need to feel that it is justified, and that the use of said authority is justified. For example, I am happy to accept my professor's authority, as he's far more knowledgeable in his field than I am. He also uses his authority to help me progress. I've worked for employers, though, who had all sorts of stupid rules and who tried to make me do things that didn't sit right with me. So, I decided to work for myself :smile:.

Original post by L i b
The Government already does most of these things.


Yet the Independent Living Fund is under threat. Training offered to people in the Work Related Activity Group is subject to sanctions (a very bad idea), often not very meaningful, plus it can hinder someone's claim on reassessment as it can be thought that if someone is capable of studying part-time, they are capable of work. Which is bad logic because, for example, if someone is studying with the Open University, they can (so long as assignment deadlines are met) study when they feel well enough to do so, and not study on days when they are too ill/in too much pain. That doesn't really work for employers.
I can't comment on whether the decision is right or not but the maximum points on ESA is not 45 (the author must be confused with the International Baccalaureate); it is 17 x 15 = 255.
Reply 9
The ESA legislation itself is sort of OK; the problem is decision makers almost exclusively consider the points system, and don't bother with Section 29/35.

Original post by Kittiara
If someone doesn't score 15 points or more, their money is stopped.


It's 12 points.

Then there's the choice - which isn't really a choice if your health doesn't permit you to work - claim JSA (and declare yourself fit to work), or appeal. At no stage in this process does anyone analyse what type of work someone might be able to do. At no stage is there an offer of support.


Claiming JSA does not affect an appeal against ESA. Also, as long as you provide sicknotes, you'll be paid at the JSA rate during the appeal period. The period you'll be cashless is the mandatory reconsideration period.

Appeals are a difficult process. People can be left without any money for months on end. How this is supposed to help their mental and physical health, I don't know. I have helped people with appeals and witnessed the deterioration of their health during the half a year or more that it tends to take to sort things. One man was given zero points by the assessor, who blatantly lied in her report and overlooked all the medical evidence. He was in such a state mentally, that he was unable to complete the appeal, so I was allowed to pursue it for him. By the end, he was ready to give up on life. Thankfully, his appeal was accepted and he was placed back in the Support Group, where he should have been all along. Unfortunately, his condition was a whole lot worse than it had been before the assessment.


Yep, the DWP as crap. The courts don't care about them though, once it actually gets there.

Personally, I feel that the current process is unlawful because it's causing harm to people. I'm not saying that there shouldn't be any assessments, but the current process isn't fit for purpose. We need assessments that are humane, that are based on solid medical evidence, and that are actually designed to help and support people.


Section 29/35 give ample room for movement. The issue is the DWP assessors [and ATOS] are incapable of assessing correctly. The way it's assessed most definitely needs changed.
Reply 10
Original post by L i b
Well, either the doctor is right and it is in fact simply an error, or he is wrong and the process was correct.

In neither case is it ideological. If it is an error, fine. You'll find that, in assessing thousands of people, that will happen occasionally.


30-40% of appeals reaching the courts [depending on region] overturn the DWP decision makers. I wouldn't call that an 'occasional happening.' It's either sheer incompetence and endemic failure or something entirely more sinister. That figure rises to over 50% if you include mandatory reconsideration overturns.
Original post by samba


It's 12 points.





It's 15 points
Original post by samba
The ESA legislation itself is sort of OK; the problem is decision makers almost exclusively consider the points system, and don't bother with Section 29/35.

It's 12 points.

Claiming JSA does not affect an appeal against ESA. Also, as long as you provide sicknotes, you'll be paid at the JSA rate during the appeal period. The period you'll be cashless is the mandatory reconsideration period.

Yep, the DWP as crap. The courts don't care about them though, once it actually gets there.

Section 29/35 give ample room for movement. The issue is the DWP assessors [and ATOS] are incapable of assessing correctly. The way it's assessed most definitely needs changed.


I think it's 15 - http://www.atoshealthcare.com/downloads/A_guide_to_Employment_and_Support_Allowance_The_Work_Capability_Assessment_%28ESA214%29.pdf (page 14).

Aye, and there is no time limit to the mandatory reconsideration period :frown:. As for JSA, thanks, I guess that's changed now. It was about three years ago when I helped with those appeals, and back then I was advised by the DWP that JSA claims during appeals could affect the subsequent decisions.

And aye, I've interviewed a man before who suffers from a rare circadian rhythm sleep disorder, which also affected his health overall. He was assessed by someone with a physiotherapy qualification who had no knowledge whatsoever of the disorder. Needless to say, this didn't help him.
(edited 9 years ago)
Reply 13
Original post by samba
30-40% of appeals reaching the courts [depending on region] overturn the DWP decision makers. I wouldn't call that an 'occasional happening.' It's either sheer incompetence and endemic failure or something entirely more sinister. That figure rises to over 50% if you include mandatory reconsideration overturns.


I'm not sure how often such appeals all the way to court. I'd suspect that'd be a tiny, tiny number. Of any case that ends up in court, there is usually a fairly good rate of success simply because, had a case been poor, it wouldn't have been continued that far.

Similar figures are often used for overturns at a normal appeal. Higher figures are used for where the person has advocacy, although I do seem to recall it's largely the same for people who simply turn up and fully pursue the appeal.

The actual overturn on decisions rate changes over time - it was about 3% last year. That's a couple of percentage points down from old the incapacity benefit assessments.

In reality, when you're assessing millions of people, there are generally going to be mistakes or areas where new information can be brought to light. If it's a problem, it's been a problem for a very long time.
Original post by L i b


The actual overturn on decisions rate changes over time - it was about 3% last year. That's a couple of percentage points down from old the incapacity benefit assessments.



But remember that isn't a 97% accuracy rate. No-one appeals a wrongful award and wrongful awards are quite significant for the system. The perception of wrongful claiming shapes public attitude towards the whole system and has undoubtedly been a major driver of the toughening up of the system.

Quick Reply

Latest