Quote:
Originally Posted by fulcrum
Hotcoupe - apology accepted and one back from me if any of my comments rubbed.
As it happens I too am disabled - two shot knees from rugby- I limit myself to a Blue Badge. I could technically claim DLA but do not because I have adapted and it would be taking the piss.
I am sorry to hear about your wife. On the face of it she is getting a raw deal but ATOS Doctors do NOT make he final decision. DWP decision makers do and they do so purely on the evidence presented to them, by the individual, their GP etc and ATOS. I guess you have asked for and seen that evidence to ensure it is complete and correct.
I know little about MS other than it is a complex disease but in the most common type symptoms come and go for many years. I do know ATOS Doctors will take the view that these are often manageable and with the right reasonable adjustments under disability law - work is very possible. But I know nothing about your wife's personal circumstances so will leave it there.
You asked what happened to the other 88600 people in the statistics I supplied.49300 were placed in the work related activity group (not expected to look for work immediately but will be able to some in the future with support - placed on higher rate ESA after 13 weeks) and 39400 were judged to fall within the support group (not fit for work and not likely to be). So in summary 68% entitled to benefit and 32% not.
As for DLA - I have to disagree with you. Though it has been tightened up considerably in the last few years. Here are the 2010 statistics.
Evidence Used in DLA New Claim Decisions, 2010.
Claim Form Only 16%
General Practitioner Report 42%
Medical Examination Report 6%
Other Source of Evidence 36%
So only 6% of claimants had a medical examination.
In ten years, the number of people claiming DLA has risen by almost 35% (from 2.4 million to 3.3 million)
DLA can be awarded for a fixed or an indefinite period. People can continue to receive the allowance after reaching age 65 if they continue to satisfy the entitlement conditions. Most awards are indefinite. Reasons for stopping claiming are death, reduction in care needs or leaving the UK. And the most common cause is death. An unfortunately high number do not declare reduction in care requirements or that they have left the UK. Hence the daily media articles on fraudsters and why DWP has people in Spain, Portugal, India, Pakistan and Bangladesh.
You also doubt DWP statistics and prefer what the various lobby groups say. They are the same statistics! Interpreted differently. But the DWP's interpretation becomes a Parliamentary record in most cases.They are also verified by the UK Statistics Authority for National Statistics - they are an Independent body and are not particularly favorable to some Ministers interpretation of them.
As for the tick box - this is part of the Work Capability Assessment (WCA). DWP rightfully got real stick over this and committed themselves to ensure that the WCA is as fair and accurate as possible, As part of this, Professor Malcolm Harrington, a highly respected Occupational Physician, has carried out three independent reviews of the WCA. It has been almost totally revamped and he is happy with it now (cost DWP a fortune.) Though he did think the pace of implementation of these changes too slow.
Sorry for the long response.
|
Sorry to hear of your troubles Fella,and thanks for the apology.
I can't imagine we'd make the best of drinking buddies,as I rather suspect that we would have very different views,certainly on this subject,if no other.
I'm an ordinary Joe,a very sceptical one, and you as you said in the closed thread,you advise MP's and other bodies on certain issues,and probably have access to certain information that I don't.
I'd imagine that perhaps we see things differently,you appear to prefer data and statistics put foward by Govt bodies and the ilk,unsurprisingly I don't.
Trusting Govt and any other politicians is extremely foolhardy,and I could list the genuine reasons as to why this is the case on all ten fingers/thumbs, and all ten toes,I have then run out of digits to use.
Coming back to DLA, you place great store in only 6% of claimants having a medical examination,why is this so important?
I see the reason as to why only 6% of claimants need a medical examination in a different way to the way you see it,perhaps I'm being naive,but given the fact that the reported fraud figure detected in DLA claimants is 0.5% of the total figure claiming,perhaps I'm not as naive as I might think.
I'll stop there,with the exception of making a comment about Professor Michael Harrington,I don't doubt his credentials,and on the whole his contributions to Govt policy has often sided on those who genuinely need help.
However it hasn't escaped my attention that Professor Michael Harrington was effectively sacked from his position, and the 4th review of the WCA is being carried out by Dr Paul Litchfield.
Why Govt policy needs quite so many reviews is interesting,and one can't help wondering just how much money these reviews cost.
The other interesting question to ask is why the Professor was replaced after carrying out
three reviews,and why the feck is a
fourth review needed and by a different professional.
Could it be that Professor Michael Harrington's recommendations favoured those that others didn't want to be favoured?
Trust a Politician?
Trust a Govt?
It would be like putting your savings in a Cypriot bank?