ChatterBank1 min ago
Proposed Medicals For Benefit Claimants.
Mentioned in the budget and supposed to be fleshed out with a statement today, do you think these medicals for incapacity benefit claimants will be carried out by doctors who are in the governments pocket and have targets to meet to reduce benefit payouts, or do you think they will be truly impartial?
Any other comments welcome, as I am in the process of making a claim, after working for forty one years.
Any other comments welcome, as I am in the process of making a claim, after working for forty one years.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.Last year I had to appeal against a decision to not award me DLA.I have emphysema and post thoracotomy pain. The benefits agency sent a doctor out to see me and assess my health. He was a great doctor who did a thorough examination and he stated there and then that he would recommend I was awarded my claim as I had grossly understated my condition on the claim form. I do think the government may try and have pet doctors but in my experience most doctors have integrity and would not lie to save money for the government.
Good luck with your claim Theland.
Good luck with your claim Theland.
One of my sons is disabled, and I, too, found that the doctors who visited him at home to assess our claim for DLA Mobility were very sympathetic and recommended his claim.
The new proposed medicals state at the outset their aim to get people off benefits, not simply to assess claimants as in the past.
The new proposed medicals state at the outset their aim to get people off benefits, not simply to assess claimants as in the past.
I don't claim incapacity benefit so it won't affect me in that way I suppose. My fiance works and supports us but I need my DLA mobility allowance to get around whilst he is at work. If I didn't claim it he would have to give up work to look after me and that would mean we claimed full benefits instead.
If a person can work, at something, then they should. Not only is it better for the state but it is better for them. There will always be many genuine cases of people who cannot do any work whatsoever. However I really cannot beleive that all those on incapacity at the moment are incapable of doing nothing at all. Something has to be done and I suspect there will be the odd case that goes wrong that all the papers will jump on.
By and large it should be a good thing, doubtful any doctor will jump to targets.
By and large it should be a good thing, doubtful any doctor will jump to targets.
I have had a number of the former medical assessments at centralised centres and accept they are necessary to ensure the system is not de-frauded. However, by stating categorically that the new measure is to reduce benefit claimants, the new system is slightly more sinister in my opinion and I do feel medical concerns will not be the most important issue in the new practise.
How do these doctors judge a persons stress levels satisfactorily? Are we going to put rats in cages on their faces to see if they are genuinely anxious/depressed/psychotic, or swinging the lead? I would love to know how they will determine that the voices in my head are a serious problem rather than nothing more serious than what the average man tolerates from a nagging wife.
I think most people accept that the rise in numbers on incapacity benefit is a major concern, but maybe we would do well to ask, why are so many people depressed and anxious in their lives these days. Surely, the government isn't suggesting that GP's are colluding with benefit fraud by handing out medication, willy nilly.
How do these doctors judge a persons stress levels satisfactorily? Are we going to put rats in cages on their faces to see if they are genuinely anxious/depressed/psychotic, or swinging the lead? I would love to know how they will determine that the voices in my head are a serious problem rather than nothing more serious than what the average man tolerates from a nagging wife.
I think most people accept that the rise in numbers on incapacity benefit is a major concern, but maybe we would do well to ask, why are so many people depressed and anxious in their lives these days. Surely, the government isn't suggesting that GP's are colluding with benefit fraud by handing out medication, willy nilly.
I wonder how much information these Government Doctors will have access to, presumably they will have access to the NHS computer system which may or may not be correct. This is not the same as your own GP who may know that you just manage with a chronic illness and do not go to the Doctors for no real reason other than a bit of sympathy. This does not mean you are able to work just that there is no more the Doctor can do at present.
I have had a chest disease for 60 years but left work because I developed another illness, I can't remember when I last saw my Doctor regarding my chest, so when I claimed DLA I was refused as my Doctor failed to mention my chest disease and the woman at DLA virtually accused me of lying about it. A lobe of my lung was removed in 1953 and there are patches of disease on the rest but I still don't get DLA mobility.
I worked in the Benefit Agency for 20 years and saw people being told they could return to work on a Doctor doing a paper review of their case, often totally incorrectly after appeals were made. No apology could make up for the distress caused.
Many years ago home visits were cancelled, if these were brought back and well-trained officers sent to see people in their own homes claims would reduce. 1] some wouldn't want someone calling, rare on genuine illness.
2] If claiming difficulty in walking ask to see stick, frame etc if none to hand how do they get about?
3] What other aid do they have?
Visits also helped people to claim all they were entitled to.
Yes Doctors will have a target figure to find people fit for work.
Both Cameron and Brown have disabled children I wonder if they will in future years be told they have to work, the one with CF maybe able to a bit, but not for long.
I have had a chest disease for 60 years but left work because I developed another illness, I can't remember when I last saw my Doctor regarding my chest, so when I claimed DLA I was refused as my Doctor failed to mention my chest disease and the woman at DLA virtually accused me of lying about it. A lobe of my lung was removed in 1953 and there are patches of disease on the rest but I still don't get DLA mobility.
I worked in the Benefit Agency for 20 years and saw people being told they could return to work on a Doctor doing a paper review of their case, often totally incorrectly after appeals were made. No apology could make up for the distress caused.
Many years ago home visits were cancelled, if these were brought back and well-trained officers sent to see people in their own homes claims would reduce. 1] some wouldn't want someone calling, rare on genuine illness.
2] If claiming difficulty in walking ask to see stick, frame etc if none to hand how do they get about?
3] What other aid do they have?
Visits also helped people to claim all they were entitled to.
Yes Doctors will have a target figure to find people fit for work.
Both Cameron and Brown have disabled children I wonder if they will in future years be told they have to work, the one with CF maybe able to a bit, but not for long.
I know a young person who had a drug problem as a youngster, went on to develop a 'mental problem' and gets full benefits. He and his teenage girlfriend have just had a baby, which got them out of a damp flat into a much better one. They pay for nothing, have free travel anywhere in Scotland (him and a 'companion'). He could earn �500 pw + clothing + pick-up from door but won't work because he says he needs to 'carry the pram downstairs for her'!
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.