Anyone been seen by atos and kept incapacity benefit/esa?

[zippy]

I think that the biggest problem is the HCP's ignorance or lack of understanding of how a specific impairment, or combination of impairments can have an impact on someones ability to work.

 

 

a diagnosis means little in respect to this , even comprehensive diagnositic tools (such as ASIA Scoring in Spinal cord injury ) still do not account for the difference ability with respect to ADLs and work related tasks between individuals

 

Surely you can't have one with out the other?

 

IE. how can you assess someone based soley on the impact their impairment has, without first knowing WHAT that impairment is, and how it works and interacts with the environment.

 

Impairment not diagnosis , this is the purpose of the assessments

 

 

Not only that, you then need to add the societal barriers that exist for disabled people accessing work, such as lack of accesssable transport,

 

perhaps an issue 20 years ago , very much less so now , although (heavy) Rail is lagging behind buses, trams and taxis /PHVs , also must as it seems to grieve people blue badges and mobility component of DLA ...

 

workplaces etc etc. (accessable in the broadest sense of the word)

 

far less so than in the past - new builds and substantial works have had to be DDA compliant for quite a few years now,

 

and yes, peoples own personal barriers about working.

 

Although they might appear to be 'workshy' or adopting the sick role etc. they might have genuine fears and concerns about re entering the work place, and these NEED to be addressed.

 

The original aim of ESA was to have the majority of people placed in the work related group so they could be helped and supported to a place where they are able to work. However, the government have changed the agenda so more people are being kicked off, and left to fend for themselves on JSA, where they will not be helped and will really struggle to find an appropiate job, or training they might need before re entering the work place.

 

the services are there if people choose to use them, this is about propaganda from political opportunists and playing on people's fears rather than the actual issues ...

[juniee]

never said that in telesales you would have to hold a phone all day but some jobs you would such as receptionist and yes have worked in telesales sorry to dissapoint you

are you sure that you do not work for the government

even the man that designed this system has said that is not being used properly and that most people should have gone into the support group it was not meant to take every one off their benefits

[HeadingNorth]

IE. how can you assess someone based soley on the impact their impairment has, without first knowing WHAT that impairment is, and how it works and interacts with the environment.

 

What the impairment might be, is irrelevant. The question of whether you are capable of work does not depend on what name your ailment has. It depends only on how you are able to live a normal, everyday life.

 

That's what the assessment is for.

[HeadingNorth]

The original aim of ESA was to have the majority of people placed in the work related group so they could be helped and supported to a place where they are able to work. However, the government have changed the agenda so more people are being kicked off, and left to fend for themselves on JSA, where they will not be helped and will really struggle to find an appropiate job, or training they might need before re entering the work place.

 

Actually if you checked the statistics, you would know that the majority of people are being placed in the work-related activity group. Barely one-third (37% if I remember correctly) are actually being deemed fit for work.

 

There are many faults with the current assessment system, but people making incorrect claims about it is not helping us to discuss them.

[verydull]

a diagnosis means little in respect to this , even comprehensive diagnositic tools (such as ASIA Scoring in Spinal cord injury ) still do not account for the difference ability with respect to ADLs and work related tasks between individuals

 

 

 

Impairment not diagnosis , this is the purpose of the assessments

 

Without knowledge of the impairment, you can not assess accurately.

 

 

 

perhaps an issue 20 years ago , very much less so now , although (heavy) Rail is lagging behind buses, trams and taxis /PHVs , also must as it seems to grieve people blue badges and mobility component of DLA ...

 

As I said accessibility in its widest form. You can not get on a bus if you are in a wheelchair without someone helping you. You can not travel independently on a bus in a wheelchair. Of course though, I am not just talking about wheelchair users, as disabled people have many different impairments and it is simply not possible to accommodate for all on public transport. It will never be truly accessible.

 

 

 

far less so than in the past - new builds and substantial works have had to be DDA compliant for quite a few years now,

 

I am glad you raised the issue of the DDA or as it is now known the Equality Act. Unfortunately, the law can not protect disabled people from the attitudinal barriers that exist in society. As this article shows, hate crime is on the rise, and its fueled by the medias reporting of the new benefits. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/feb/05/benefit-cuts-fuelling-abuse-disabled-people.

 

There are several problems with the law to protect disabled peoples rights. It is reactionary, so only works if a disabled person themselves has experienced discrimination and has the ability to bring a case themselves. This prevents a lot of cases being heard, as its a big barrier for a lot of disabled people. There are parts of the law that says you have to anticipate the needs of a disabled person, but the only way to challenge it if someone hasn't is to do it yourself.

 

Second is the whole area of reasonable adjustments. The majority of businesses will argue that making themselves more accessible is simply not a reasonable adjustment, and will cost too much money, so they don't have to do it.

 

And of course, they don't have to if they can find another excuse, such as a listed building, health and safety etc.

 

 

 

the services are there if people choose to use them, this is about propaganda from political opportunists and playing on people's fears rather than the actual issues ...

 

These are real issues, and they are real fears. The services are not there for people to use, believe me I have tried to.

[verydull]

Actually if you checked the statistics, you would know that the majority of people are being placed in the work-related activity group. Barely one-third (37% if I remember correctly) are actually being deemed fit for work.

 

There are many faults with the current assessment system, but people making incorrect claims about it is not helping us to discuss them.

 

 

its 39% and of those who appeal their decisions, 40% are successful.

[HeadingNorth]

Without knowledge of the impairment, you can not assess accurately.

 

That's a semantically null sentence. The purpose of the assessment is to obtain knowledge about the impairment. Just not about the diagnosis, which is irrelevant.

[verydull]

What the impairment might be, is irrelevant. The question of whether you are capable of work does not depend on what name your ailment has. It depends only on how you are able to live a normal, everyday life.

 

That's what the assessment is for.

 

The assessment is there to assess someones functional ability. Don't over simplfy an impairment to 'just a label'. To judge someone fit for work without context of their impairment is just a dangerous game, and one the government shouldn't be playing. You could look at a lot of disabled people and think, they are ok, but in reality they have a severe impairment, which has a lot of disabling effects in society.

 

A normal, every day life? What is the definition of that? Is someone who is disabled somehow not living this normal every day life? It seems that is what you are implying.

[HeadingNorth]

The assessment is there to assess someones functional ability.

 

Yes. That's exactly the point we've been making all this time. Why were you arguing?

[verydull]

That's a semantically null sentence. The purpose of the assessment is to obtain knowledge about the impairment. Just not about the diagnosis, which is irrelevant.

 

The impairment and diagnosis are the same thing?