IDS - work is good for your health

Galen is a professional assessor. Check what she says.

It is the assessment system which needs to be sanctioned and changed - or the forms they fill in. - many many situations would be a grey area - and these cases should be given the benefit of the doubt or there should be space for any assessor to write dpwn the exact problem.
Thank goodness as yet I have never needed to fill in any forms to do with claiming benefit but I have seen other people's and it seems to me that many questions need a yes or no answer - but yes or no is often no good as an answer - this is why I am saying that an assessor ( a proffessional medical or social type of person) and who really knows the claimant needs to be involved - with maybe some secondary back up to protect the assessor.

Like many other things this Govt seems to announce things before they have been fully thought through or any available evidence looked at. Too many vulnerable and honest people are being put under unnecessary stress and worry. There also needs to be a continuation of benefits for people who feel ready to try working again so that they have enough money to see them over till they get paid - which will usually be at least a week and maybe a month. There needs be a shortened way back to assistance if they are unable to continue working or it is seasonal/temporary work.

I tried to post on here two pages ago but a glitch somewhere prevented me from posting what I had written!

"As a member of the work and pensions select committee, I have called for Iain Duncan Smith to resign following revelations that his department created a leaflet about sanctions containing made-up quotes attributed to non-existent benefit claimants.

“I instigated an inquiry into the use of sanctions by the work and pensions committee, which reported in March this year, and I believe after being caught out so publicly it must be impossible for Iain Duncan Smith to continue as work and pensions secretary and he should do the honourable thing and resign.

“This is yet another example of not only his incompetence, but what can only be described as very shady and unscrupulous behaviour not befitting a Member of Parliament let alone a Secretary of State leading a Government Department.

“Once again, Duncan Smith is caught trying to paint a particular picture of social security claimants. He is a disgrace and should do the honourable thing and resign. When his own department have to resort to this sort of tactic, in a desperate attempt to make it appear as though the system is working, no-one can be left believing that his draconian social security sanctions regime is fit for purpose.

“Only Mr Duncan Smith seems to believe that unfair and inappropriate use of sanctions on vulnerable social security claimants is acceptable. And now he’s shown that he thinks it’s acceptable for his department to produce literature that is fabricated in a desperate attempt to make people believe his sanctions regime is working fairly.

“It beggars belief that David Cameron can, in the light of this embarrassing debacle, continue to back Mr Duncan Smith as a credible work and pensions secretary when he has presided over such a catalogue of errors.

“In the last few weeks alone, the independent Social Security Advisory Committee has produced a report which says that the Government’s sanctions regime should be given ‘an urgent and robust review’.

“And following the Government’s appeal against the Information Commissioner’s ruling compelling the Government to publish figures on the number of people on Incapacity Benefit and Employment and Support Allowance who have died between November 2011 and May 2014, including those found fit for work, a Tribunal has now been set for November 10 to hear why Iain Duncan Smith has refused to publish these data.

“I will never forget the fact that not only did Iain Duncan Smith defy the Information Commissioner’s ruling to provide these data on deaths of people on social security, but that he stated to me, personally, in Parliament, it did not exist. But then, just two days later, the Prime Minister said to me, again in Parliament, the data would be published, only for the DWP’s appeal documents to defy him as well, stating publication was not in the public interest!

“The select committee inquiry which I instigated reported in March and the mountain of evidence that was put before the select committee by religious organisations, academics and charities, not to mention those actually affected by inappropriate sanctions themselves, pointed overwhelmingly to a system that is inhumane and deliberately created to skew unemployment figures.

“The sad truth is that Iain Duncan Smith is doing everything he can to cover up the mess he has created.

“This is a mess that is ruining innocent people’s lives and, as the evidence suggests, even killing some.

“The only credible reason he’s going to such lengths to hang on to his job is because he knows he has so much to hide.”

This was written by a member of the select committee, Debbie Abrahams.
Of course, I do not believe certain people on here will believe this or agree with it.

Here is a top tip on being sanctioned, there are more in the link :

"If you’re unfairly threatened with a sanction, or actually sanctioned, immediately complain in writing to your MP’s office. Send a copy to jobcentre plus and the private sector provider so that they know that your MP’s office is now involved. Complaints where an MP is known to be involved are taken much more seriously."

www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/other-benefits/jobseeker-s-allowance/jsa-sanctions

Eloethan the example you quoted was initially from The Mirror. I've read too many inaccurate or sensationalist reports from the press to believe thrm without verification. I am pleased that the man's benefits were not cut given the circumstances, and I trust that those circumstances were documented so that justice prevailed in the end.

I agree that those trying to enforce the system leave a lot to be desired, whether through overwork, lack of training or just not being the right kind of people to work with vulnetable people. The blatant inefficiency of that particular department is inexcusable.

Far North I did start to read the Handard Report but it was frankly too long but I'll accept that it backs up what was originally posted in a more accurate way than a tabloid report.

I think that people underestimate how much a physical illness/disability can affect a person psychologically, and undermine their confidence, leading to all sorts of problems.

I have a cousin ,now in his 60 s who has suffered from mental illness all his life, and apart from one brief period has never been able to work. It may have been possible if he could have worked in an environment that recognised his needs/problems!s, but this was never going to happen so he has lived his entire life at home with my Aunt his mother. I am grateful that he will be too old to go through bubbles sons experience.

Anya did you read the Hansard extract and do you believe it?

Anya I'm not suggesting the man's benefits were cut with the knowledge that he had suffered a heart attack during the assessment. I'm suggesting that some of the people carrying out these assessments and doing the paperwork are either overworked, not up to the job or inadequately trained - or the whole system is focused too much on getting claimants onto the assessment conveyor belt and dealing with their assessments in double quick time in order, I suspect, to meet certain targets. I believe Galen is in some way involved in such assessments and she is not surprised to hear about these sorts of occurrences.

Here's another example from 2014:

"A mentally ill woman forced on to the Coalition’s Work Programme is in a coma – but is still being sent letters by benefits assessors.

Bipolar patient Sheila Holt, 47, was sectioned in December after being taken off Income Support. Days later she had a heart attack and fell into the coma.

This weekend, Miss Holt, of Rochdale, Gtr Manchester, was sent a letter by Atos to ask why she was not working."

An article from 2012, about IDS's visit to Easterhouse in Glasgow in 2002:
www.theguardian.com/society/2012/jun/19/thanks-iain-duncan-smith-poor-must-cry

IDS has now been invited to return to Easterhouse to see how its residents are being affected by his policies:
scottishindependence.com/2015/08/snp-invite-iain-duncan-smith-back-to-glasgow/

Natalie McGarry MP said:
"When he visited last time he spoke about his belief in ‘compassionate conservatism’ and that ‘everyone should have enough money to live properly in their community.’ It is clear that many in my constituency are not only unable to do that, but in fact their lives have been made significantly worse by the actions of Iain Duncan Smith’s department."

Of course I'm willing to accept an apology, but of course that won't happen.

Actually Gill your assumptions totally inaccurate too. I have lived with someone with serious mental health issues, and she did kill herself in the end.

GillT57 well that takes the biscuit, just looking for an excuse to name call again? I didn't make a 'comment' if you'd bothered to read my post.

I asked a question.

And the question was to Galen not to VQ so you really make yourself look a bit of a twit.

I accompanied my adult son to an ESA work capability assessment. He has mental health issues, agoraphobia, panic attacks. He had to resign from his job because the company he worked for were not understanding of his difficulties, and the increasing pressure they put him under led to him breaking down completely.
He had been in the room for about ten minutes when the assessor came to find me. She looked shocked and asked me to come in as he was having a panic attack. He was struggling but with my help tried to carry on, as he did not want to leave and have to go back and do it all again.
He got to the end of the assessment and we left. He was declared fit for work.

A brief extract from Hansard :
"Debbie Abrahams (Oldham East and Saddleworth) (Lab): I wonder whether my hon. Friend is aware of the case of one of my constituents. He was receiving ESA, but had a heart attack during his assessment and was sanctioned as a result of leaving it. I called on the Government to hold an independent review of the inappropriate use of sanctions. They committed to do so in the Work and Pensions Committee, but are now reneging on that. Is that not a disgrace?"
www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmhansrd/cm140227/debtext/140227-0002.htm

Anya I assume from your somewhat unfeeling and ill considered comments to VQ that you have never lived with anyone with mental illness. Self harming can happen at any age, even 'our age' as can suicide. As to believing some of the examples, you only need to read of the issues VQ had with housing benefit when she correctly and honestly reported a slight change in her circumstances. I can't believe you are really so blinkered and unfeeling as you come across.

You'd be surprised what I see and hear.

I'd probably believe something from someone who'd witnessed such crass stupidly first hand, but not hearsay or in a newspaper.

I can!

Sorry, but cannot believe the above examples happened. If someone has a heart attack during an assessment it would be documented.

How about this for efficiency, professionalism and sensitivity jingle:

(The Mirror)
"A depressed blind man killed himself after he was left penniless because his benefits were slashed, an inquest heard

"Desperate Tim Salter struggled to even feed himself when controversial private firm Atos ruled he was fit for work, despite his failing eyesight.

The 53-year-old, who also suffered agoraphobia, was about to be kicked out of his housing association home when he hanged himself in the hall.

A coroner ruled the Government’s decision to axe Tim’s meagre incapacity benefit [£30 per week] contributed to his death."

or this:

"A man who was forced to give up work with heart problems had his benefits axed for failing to complete a capability assessment - after suffering a heart attack during the examination.

During the appointment, he was told he was having a cardiac arrest, forcing the nurse to stop the test.

Two weeks later he got a letter from Jobcentre Plus saying he had withdrawn from the assessment and, as such, was being sanctioned."

I agree that having a job can be helpful in alleviating depression and other illnesses. A job can take a person's mind off their problems and provide a routine and a sense of control over one's life. However, people who have had a serious physical or mental illness or who are experiencing a gradual deterioration in a chronic illness/disability must be sensitively supported into finding a job which will take account of their specific health issues. And people who have terminal illnesses or whose illnesses are very painful or debilitating should, I feel, be left alone.

Illness can seriously affect a person's confidence and can make them fearful of new situations. I expect anyone on Gransnet who has, for instance, fallen as a result of a giddy spell or deteriorating mobility will know that it can lead to anxiety about going out alone or even going out at all. Likewise, people who have had a heart attack become fearful that anything they do might bring on another attack. It seems that assessments very much focus on basic physical tasks, without properly considering the psychological barriers that are also likely to be present.

Anyway, as someone else said, there may not be suitable jobs available and many employers are reluctant to take on people who are perhaps older and who have been absent from the workplace through serious illness, or people of any age who have had mental health or addiction issues. Many of the jobs that have been created in the last few years fall under the "self-employed" category and are part-time. One in four new jobs created are now zero hours contracts. It seems to me that neither of these options are suitable for someone who has been ill because the inevitable anxiety connected to uncertain hours of work and levels of income may well cause a recurrence of the illness, or worse.

Somehow I don't believe Iain Duncan Smith's proposals to tighten up the system is motivated by a deep and heartfelt concern for the claimants' wellbeing.

I worked for most of my life in jobs that did not stimulate me. But I did them anyway because I had to earn. Yet I still think back fondly on those years because I enjoyed working because of the social stimulation and interaction with colleagues, a sense of receiving reward in exchange for mty efforts, the security it provided. All of those trumped any dissatisfaction I may have felt at the job being mundane and therefore it was good for my mental health.

Surely not at 'our age'?

Mental health problems. Ie self harming

What on earth condition would make someone rip their arms to pieces?

VQ a one armed man wouldn't pass the ESA test.
No points for self harm and you'd have to rely on regulations 29 and 35