activity, annual, appeal, Atos, benefit, benefits, Coalition, Conservative, Department for Work and Pensions, descriptor, disability, disabled, doctor, Dr, DWP, Employment and Support Allowance, ESA, ESA50, fluctuating, form, fourth, government, Group, health, Iain Duncan Smith, Incapacity Benefit, Independent, interview, Job Centre Plus, Liberal, Liberal Democrat, Malcolm Harrington, mark hoban, mental, Mike Sivier, mikesivier, Paul Litchfield, people, politics, poll, Prof, Professor, provider, re-assessment, record, recording, review, sick, social security, Tories, Tory, tribunal, unum, voodoo, Vox Political, WCA, welfare, work capability assessment, Work Programme, work-related
The Coalition government is launching a call for evidence to help with its fourth annual independent review into the Work Capability Assessment process – and I, for one, will be delighted to be part of it.
The review will be carried out by Dr Paul Litchfield, a senior occupational physician replacing Professor Malcolm Harrington, who ran the review process for the previous three years.
According to the Department for Work and Pensions’ press release, it “will continue the process of monitoring whether the assessment is effective in identifying people who could be helped back to work, while ensuring financial support goes to those who are too sick or disabled to seek employment”.
We all know that the WCA is a total failure in those terms. Recent Work Programme and appeal tribunal statistics are unequivocal in making that clear.
Now – if you have had the same experience of the assessment process as I, and Mrs Mike, have – it is time for you to have your say.
If you are an individual or a member of an organisation with information on how the Work Capability Assessment is operating and further changes that may be needed to improve the process, then you can submit it using the online form on this web page:
It also includes links to more information about the reviews, large print and Easy Read documents. Audio and BSL versions “will be made available on this page shortly”.
The DWP press release has a lot to say about how well they have performed in changing the system so far. It is worth quoting here, just to show you the importance of the need to challenge this attitude. It states:
“In launching the call for evidence, Dr Litchfield will be considering both how the suggested improvements from previous reviews are working, and what further refinements can be made. Dr Litchfield is particularly interested in hearing how the WCA works for people with mental health conditions.
“Dr Paul Litchfield said: ‘This fourth review is an appropriate time to review the impact of the changes that have been made to the WCA in recent years, including those recommended by my predecessor Professor Malcolm Harrington. I will also be considering if more can be done to ensure that the assessment process is both effective and perceived as being objective by all stakeholders.
“‘I am keen to hear from people who have constructive and evidence-based ideas for improvement. The WCA touches many lives and it is in the interest of all of us to try and make it as good as we can.’
“Employment Minister Mark Hoban said: ‘Helping people who can work into a job, while giving financial support to people who need it, is one of my top priorities. That is why it is so important that the Work Capability Assessment is as effective as possible.
“‘Following the previous independent reviews we have already made considerable improvements to the assessment process, so this new review is a great opportunity to build on that progress.’
“This is the fourth in a series of 5 annual independent reviews into the Work Capability Assessment. The previous reviewer, Professor Harrington, made a number of recommendations, and in his third review found that – as improvements were starting to have an impact – no fundamental reforms were needed to the current WCA. Over 40 recommendations have been, or are being, implemented including:
- Better communication with claimants, including phone calls from decision-makers to ensure all medical evidence has been provided
- Introducing 60 mental health champions into assessment centres to provide advice to Atos healthcare professionals
- Working with charities to test out new descriptors covering mental function and fluctuating conditions
- Simplifying the process for people undergoing treatment for cancer – reducing the need for face-to-face assessments and ensuring more are placed in the Support Group.”
If “no fundamental reforms are needed”, then why is the DWP refusing to provide details of the number of people who are dying while going through the assessment process, appealing against its decision, or after having been thrown off-benefit? Clearly it seems to have something to hide and until we find out what that is, such claims should be considered to be wild fantasies with no basis in reality.
You’ll notice the possibility of having the Work Capability Assessment recorded is not mentioned, even though there was a debate within the last month. Does Hoban really think our memories are so short?
A submission from myself and Mrs Mike would include information on the run-up to the assessment, including the fact that we were not told we had to announce in advance our desire to have the interview recorded. When I arrived, dictaphone in hand, the Atos employees kicked up a fuss about it that could have stopped the interview taking place at all. That would not have been our fault but theirs, for failing to make the situation clear. We would also point out that claims by the DWP to have only 31 recorders are in error, as the tick-box assessment they use is carried out on laptop computers that can easily – and probably do – carry recording and CD-burning software. It would be simplicity itself to provide simple microphones for both assessor and assessee to use, to make questions and responses clear, and concerns over tampering with recordings may be addressed by a time-check at the start and finish.
I would raise issue with the ESA50 form, that includes ‘descriptors’ that are said to be intended to help describe a claimant’s condition. In fact they do no such thing. They are there to help Atos assessors fit you into the categories laid out by Unum when it originally devised the process as a way to avoid making payments to customers whose insurance policies had matured. It would be far better to allow claimants to describe their symptoms and provide medical evidence from their doctors; the fact that this would require the DWP staff reviewing the forms to use their brains in consideration of the individual situation, rather than slavishly follow instructions that try to shoehorn people into pre-defined groups, is of no concern to the claimant.
I would raise issue with the Work Capability Assessment itself, which also attempts to bypass explanations of the issues in order to shoehorn claimants into providing “yes” or “no” answers to its questions. We have seen from the Conservative Party’s own ‘voodoo’ polling that, if a question is framed in a particular way, the questioner will get the answer they want, and this would not necessarily be productive.
Mrs Mike has mental health issues. There was no concession to those issues during her assessment and I do not recall them being explored at all.
Mrs Mike has fluctuating health conditions. There was no inquiry into how those changes affect her daily life.
Changes for both of the above may have been brought in after the assessment, but they are still relevant to my partner. However, no attempt has been made to contact her or explore her situation in the light of these developments. That is a grave omission.
She was put in the work-related activity group and asked to visit her local Job Centre Plus for interviews. After doing so, and being passed on to a Work Programme Provider, it took just one half-hour telephone conversation to establish that this organisation could do nothing for her, and she was advised to seek re-assessment. This was six months into her one-year period on ESA (remember, those in the work-related activity group get benefit for one year only). Nobody had contacted her during the first four months she was on the benefit.
Mrs Mike did ask for reassessment but nothing was done about it. She is, in fact, going through the assessment process again, but this is because a year has passed since her initial assessment and it is therefore time for her to go through the whole torturous process again. The form went off in mid-May and we have yet to hear back from the DWP.
From our point of view, the whole situation has been a farce.
If you have been through the process, how did you find it?
Don’t just tell us – tell the independent assessor.
i have been a victim of constant abuse by the DWP for over 33 years so this is not new there are a few at the DWP that are out to make your life hell and kill you but there are others that treat you well so lets just say my luck overall is not good
At this moment in time thou things are very desperate my end but I’m sure that like in the past thing will settle again once my mp and the police do their thing and bring calm to the situation
As I’ve always said who needs Burma when your already living it
Big Bill said:
I blogged on the subject of framing questions so they force specific answers a while ago, you may lke to read it http://www.therainbowblog.co.uk/close-ended-questions/
Pingback: Call for evidence on Work Capability Assessment: My submission | Vox Political
Dr Litchfield says;
I will also be considering if more can be done to ensure that the assessment process is both effective
[in killing as many people as possible also, creating a vast profit]
and perceived as being objective by all stakeholders.
[perceived as being objective meaning, much more PR and propaganda ]
Another prick joins the death squad.
…Yes, I’m guilty of being disabled in the UK 2013.
“Guilty”, bellows the judge while raising a pudgey finger to point at the .quivering useless eater.
And to the cheers of the braying onlookers then dismisses the case with the final solution, “Send-him-down.”
Fade to black, roll credits, ‘sponsored by Atos, DWP, Chatham House’, A UK production.’ The End.
Mike Sivier said:
Well, let’s all fight that.
Reblogged this on thepositivevoice.
Chris North said:
Erm, but do we want them to build a better mousetrap?
A TRAP that will then be that much harder for campaigners to criticise and victims to fight free of?
And just so that the DWP can taunt us in 2015 and beyond over how they ‘consulted’ disablity campaigners and ‘incorporated’ their suggestions. I would suggest that filing down a few of the rough edges on our chains, and even painting them pretty colous – will not stop them from being chains.
The WCA – even if Atos installs recliner chairs and feather beds, pipes in relaxing muzak, holds everyone’s hands, and starts handing out free tea and biscuits – will STILL be a UNUM-led instrument of disability-denial.
There is NEVER a justification for a ‘work capability assessment’ when the doctors treating a person have certified that they should REFRAIN from work.
The principle of RETIREMENT ON GROUNDS OF ILL-HEALTH must be constantly and loudly restated.
Let’s not forget that the other side of the WCA/WRAG coin is the pension-snatch from 60-something vulnerable adults (which they are according to the law), 5 out of 6 of whom statistically have chronic medical conditions, and some of whom are also being conscripted to WRAG via the WCA.
AS WE PUSH FOR THE LATEST ESA CORPSE-COUNT, IT WOULD BE REALLY, REALLY, INTERESTING TO KNOW WHAT PERCENTAGE ARE OVER 60 – as well as how many sick and disabled are now dying under the rigours of WRAG and the Work Programme.
Mike Sivier said:
You haven’t read my submission in response to the call for evidence, have you?
Reblogged this on HUMAN RIGHTS & POLITICAL JOURNAL.
Pingback: Guerilla Voice: If consultation isn’t working, where’s the alternative?