Call to Ed Milliband to support the sick and disabled

"Please support Sonia Poulton's call to Ed Milliband to support the sick and disabled.

Read her letter, and sign if you agree with her. She will deliver the letter to Ed Milliband personally."

Sign here

It's a live document, which means people are signing it at the same time, so please be careful not to type in the middle of someone elses writing (like I did to start with).

The letter Sonia wishes you to read, and sign your support for is below:

"Dear Mr. Miliband,

I am a UK-based journalist and broadcaster. Here is a link to my website. http://www.soniapoulton.co.uk. On my site you will find all the media outlets that I contribute to across print, TV, radio and internet, nationally and internationally.

I am prompted to write to you having just watched these two programmes on the subject of ‘fit to work’ testing for sick and disabled people: Channel 4′s Dispatches (‘Britain On The Sick’) and BBC2′s Panorama (‘Disabled or Faking it’).

This year, as a writer, I have been made painfully aware of how distressing, unreliable and costly – both physically and emotionally – the Work Capability Assessment is for those undertaking it. The financial cost to the country is another concern altogether.

I am aware that Employment minister Chris Grayling has made much capital from blaming Labour for the introduction of this system, administered by ATOS. Equally, Mr. Grayling has made it clear that he views the Coalition’s implementation of the process as preferable, and less harsh, than that carried out under the Labour government.

WCA, clearly, is beset with problems. The ATOS assessor, captured undercover in C4′s programme, referred to it as ‘Toxic’. It was made clear that it was designed to reduce benefit recipients. Chris Grayling continues to deny there are targets. I am less inclined to believe him.

The test, at best, is unquestionably inadequate and not fit-for-purpose. Even the Government’s own adviser, before he resigned, described it as ‘patchy’. At worst, it is downright disadvantageous to those who are subject to it.

For many people the horror of the ATOS test has been the worst kept secret for years. Sadly, others have been less fortunate and are no longer here to register their misery. There currently exists a known demographic of people who have died after being found ‘fit to work’. Are you aware of this?

This year doctors at the British Medical Association have opposed WCA. Those who endure it have opposed it. Even the occasional newspaper and TV programme dares to oppose it. As a Social Commentator, I certainly have.

Why, then, has Labour – under your leadership – not opposed it? Should I assume that you support it? I am disturbed by what I view as a dangerous trend in our country. There is a clear demonisation of sick and disabled people, routinely labelled as ‘scroungers’ by the media, and driven by frequently skewed statistics issued by the DWP.

Meanwhile, the incidences of attacks on sick and disabled has risen. Disabled people are more in fear for their safety than at any other time in recent history. I believe that there is a direct correlation between the resentment whipped up about ‘spongers’ and the physical assaults taking place. Surely this is not acceptable to you. It certainly isn’t acceptable to me.

The names listed below this letter are from people who support the core message contained within it. Like me these are concerned citizens. Some are directly affected by issues of sickness and disability, others are not.

For my part, I am healthy, able-bodied and work full-time but I believe it is my duty to support those who need help. I believe that is a duty of us all. Including the Labour party.

Sickness and disability can happen at any time and to any one of us. I would like to think that others would also support me in my hour of need.

I believe what we need in this country is more compassion, not less. The WCA is unacceptable for a progressive country and it is a clear failure. The money spent on the appeals process confirms that, quite aside from the human misery it costs.

I have just heard that Tom Greatrex, MP, has secured a Westminster Hall debate on September 4 with regard ATOS and WCA. I ask you, Mr. Miliband, can we count on you to take a long overdue stance in support of our sick and disabled, too?

I do hope so. I look forward to your response.

Best wishes, Sonia Poulton"

Ministry Of Justice Video on Tribunals

[Taken word for word from one of the benefits groups]:

"Appeals video, from Benefits and Work:

HELP MAKE CHRIS GRAYLING MAD
Here’s an opportunity for you to help make a minister wish he hadn’t interfered.

Back in March we wrote about the Ministry of Justice’s (MoJ) employment and support allowance appeals video (external link) on Youtube. The video was pulled after less than a week, on the orders of senior officials.

Independent benefits expert Neil Bateman (external link), discovered that the video was taken down after employment minister Chris Grayling emailed the ministry complaining about, amongst other things, the fact that it told claimants:
that they are twice as likely to win their appeal if they appear in person rather than having a paper hearing;
that the DWP doesn’t normally send a representative to the hearing;
to send additional evidence to the tribunal, when Grayling wants it sent to the DWP.
Yesterday, three months later, the video reappeared and, to their credit, after their initial panic MoJ officials seem to have left it unaltered. The video is actually reasonably informative and reassuring for people who have no previous experience of appeal tribunals.

Normally, however, MoJ videos get very little attention – one has had just two views and few of the 120 videos on the MoJ channel gets more than a few hundred views.

If Grayling hadn’t intervened this video would probably also have remained largely unseen. Now, however, we’re asking Benefits and Work newsletter readers to make it the most popular video the MoJ has ever produced. The current record holder has had 4,269 views and the ESA video currently stands at 1,063.

So, please, make Grayling mad by taking a look at the video and passing the link on to anyone you think might benefit:"

Second letter from Chris Grayling

I received another letter from Chris Grayling, via my MP yesterday.

Dear MP

Thank you for your letter of 15 September to the Minister for Welfare Reform on behalf of Ms Olana Voljeti, regarding the Work Capability Assessment (WCA). I am replying as the Minister responsible for this area of teh Department's work.

People are entitled to Employment and Support Allowance for as long as they satisfy the entitlement conditions. To ensure that people who receive the benefit are doing so correctly and to achieve this, people will be considered to undertake a WCA to make sure that they meet the entitlement conditions. This is part of the claimant's responsibilities which balances the right to benefit.

However, it is appreciated that the process can prove stressful for some people and a number of steps have been taken to ensure that this is minimised where possible. All claimants are sent form AL1C prior to their WCA, which contains details of who to contact if they have specific needs or concerns such as the ones Ms Voljeti mentions. If it is not possible for the claimant to attend the WCA then the Healthcare professional responsible for carrying it out may, for example, be able to conduct a home visit instead if this would be more appropriate. Furthermore, even if a person fails to attend an examination, the decision maker will review all the relevant facts before reaching a decision as to whether or not benefit is payable.

I hope this is helpful to Ms Voljeti.

With best wishes,

Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP
Minister for Employment

I am not 100% certain what he is actually addressing here, and am too foggy to actually look through my letters to work it out. I remember mentioning that it would be useful if people attending medical assessments have the ability to contact the medical centre in case they cannot attend the assessment for any reason, since if you do not attend you automatically fail the assessment.

Firstly, he seems to have misunderstood my meaning. I know from personal experience that I cannot arrange a home medical unless you definitely cannot attend the medical at the centre. I was told, when trying to arrange for my medical to be performed at home, that I would have to have someone take me. With conditions such as M.E., it is quite possible that we would not be able to attend on the day of the medical when we had actually been fine the day before. My point however, was that there are a number of things that could prevent someone attending ... ones car might break down, a family emergency, the person giving you a lift may be called into work ... none of these would constitute a medical being performed at home.

He also seems to be oblivious to the reality of what is happening. Everyone I know who has been unable to attend a medical, including myself a few years ago, automatically had their benefits revoked. No one contacted me to ask why. They were just stopped, and they were stopped before I received any letter explaining why. The reason given, very clearly on the letter stated that it was because I had not attended the medical.

I would like, but know is unlikely to happen, for as many people who had that same experience, to write to Chris Grayling, all within a one week period, telling him that whilst he believes his system works in a particular way, it in fact does not.

People annoy me!

People annoy me. Seriously. Why do people spend so much of their time complaining about how things are, yet do nothing to actually put the situation right? I'm getting to the point where I just want to shout at some people now.

I belong to various groups where people discuss M.E. and similar conditions a lot. Everyone agrees that it is unfair that we have essentially been forced to give up our lives, that we do not get recognition or help from the medical profession, and that there is so little research into our conditions.

So, the Vivint competition in which a huge amount of money was given to a research institute recently finished. All people had to do was vote for a certain institute every day ... the organisation with the most votes won the money. I voted every day. I asked my friends to vote. No one did. Now see, when my friends ask me to do something like that, I do it. If it is important to them, then I do it for them. None of my friends did it. What disgusts me the most about this is that a lot of my friends have M.E. themselves, and those friends also frequently complain about how unwell they are. Yet it seems they are not willing to click a few buttons every day when they are online, in order to promote research that will help them.

It's similar in regards to the situation with the Department of Work and Pensions, and even with our own doctors. People sit behind their computers and complain about the treatment they get, and yet they just won't do anything about it. When I started writing to my MP in regards to welfare reform, I was told by some of the complainers that there's no point. In light of the letter from Chris Grayling today I can vaguely understand where they are coming from, but it just makes me want to push more. It's important! The more I encounter ignorance the more I'm going to fight it. The way things are at the moment is ruining peoples lives ... it's ruining OUR lives, so why are we not all fighting it?

It's not doctors faults that they were taught that M.E. is a psychological condition. But it is certainly our fault if we don't give them paper and articles and criteria that show them otherwise. I know there are some doctors who just won't listen, but if we don't try we don't stand a chance. Yet time and time again I hear 'it's not worth it!'. Of course it's worth it! It may not benefit you now, but you are at the very least sewing a seed that may benefit someone later on.

It's not just with regards to illness though, now that I've noticed this annoying trend, I'm seeing it everywhere. I had a problem with ATS a few weeks ago. I'm rather annoyed at the outcome of writing to them too, but again it just makes me more determined to make things right. And I will. But the fact that certain people are actively trying to persuade me not to annoys me even further.

For goodness sake people stop lying down and being doormats .. stand up for yourselves!

Letter from Chris Grayling

My MP has forwarded to me the response he received from Chris Grayling, after he sent to him my own letter. I am really upset by this. I actually sat and cried after reading it.

It's a three page letter, very well written, covering a lot of ground. However, it does NOT cover even half the issues I mentioned in my letter, and it does cover a lot of things I did not even mention. Evidently therefore we have been sent a standardised letter. I find that disgusting. He has not only wasted my time, but wasted my MPs time. What is the point in pretending to be interested in what the public has to offer if he's not even going to read the letters sent to him?

Dear Ms Voljeti

I have now received a reply to my letter from the Department of Work & Pensions regarding the Work Capability Assessment.

I am enclosing the Minister's reply which, as you will see, sets out the current situation with regard to this issue.

My thanks, again, for having raised this important matter with me and I do hope this information is of help to you.

Yours sincerely

Your MP

---------------------------------------

Thank you for your letter of 27 July on behalf of Ms Olana Voljeti regarding the Work Capability Assessment (WCA).

Entitlement to Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) is based on an individual's functional ability rather than the condition itself. Anyone claiming ESA  will undergo the WCA which is based on the premise that eligibility should not be based on a person's condition, but rather on the way that condition limits their functional capability.

The assessment gives people with fluctuating conditions the opportunity to explain how their condition varies over time. The questionnaire that customers are sent has been re-designed so that people are directly asked if their mental or physical functions vary, and to give more details of how this affects them as an individual.

The health care professionals who carry out the WCA are trained to ask about and take account of fluctuation. The assessment is not a snap-shot - if a person cannot carry out a function repeatedly and reliably they will be treated as unable to carry out that function at all.

The activities and descriptors used in the assessment were developed in consultation with medical expert and representative groups in order to ensure that they are appropriate for all conditions. The consultation involved considerable discussion about the variability of some conditions. We are now making some changes to the WCA, including ensuring that it more fully accounts for the effects of exhaustion.

Turning now to the issue of healthcare professionals' integrity, I can confirm that the Medical Services Agreement between Atos Healthcare and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) does not include any provisions either from the Department or from Atos Healthcare to incentivise healthcare professionals to find claimants undergoing the WCA fit for work, and nor would we wish to do so.

It should be noted however that all decisions on benefit entitlement are made by DWP decision makers and not by Atos Healthcare professionals. Entitlement is determined by the Department's decision makers and is based on all available evidence, including that provided by the claimant. Decision makers are rightly impartial and also not incentivised to find claimants under going the WCA fit for work.

We recognise that attending any medical assessment can be a stressful experience, and these will not be carried out if there is enough existing evidence on the claimant's  current condition to decide entitlement to the particular benefit in question. The healthcare professionals who carry out the examinations are trained in assessing vulnerable customers, and when people are asked to come for an assessment they are encouraged to bring a friend or relative with them.

I turn now to the issue regarding the overturning of decisions at appeal. An appeal tribunal hears all evidence afresh, including any new evidence that was not available to the original Jobcentre Plus decision maker, in order to decide whether the original decision on benefit entitlement was correct. Thus when an appeal panel reaches a different decision this does not necessarily mean that the original decision lacked validity.

To try and improve the accuracy of initial decision-making and reduce the number of cases which proceed to appeal, a number of innovations have been trialled within Jobcentre Plus. These include encouraging benefit applicants to submit all the available evidence at the beginning of their claim rather than only producing it for the appeal hearing; and strengthening the reconsideration process so that more decisions are reconsidered, with additional information if available, by decision makers and healthcare professionals, before proceeding to appeal.

Both of these processes have produced very encouraging results. In addition, there are processes in place for the result of appeals to be sent to both decision makers and healthcare professionals in order to improve the accuracy of decision-making, and the Department continues to monitor the outcomes of appeals to continue to improve the assessment.

We are committed to continually improving the WCA to ensure that it is as fair and accurate as possible.

As part of this, we have a statutory commitment to independently review the WCA annually for the first five years of its operation. Professor Malcolm Harrington, a highly respected occupational physician, carried out the first review, reporting in November 1020. We fully endorsed his review and have implemented the vast majority of its recommendations, and are working hard to implement the remainder as soon as possible.

In addition, a department-led review reported in March 2010. We have now implemented its recommendations which include taking better account of the effects of exhaustion and making greater provision for people awaiting or in between courses of chemotherapy. The improvements as a result of this review came in to force on 28 March.

We have now appointed Professor Harrington to conduct a second independent review of the WCA and provide further recommendations as appropriate. He has already started work on the programme of work he has identified, to look in detail at the descriptors for mental health and other fluctuating conditions. Also as part of his review, on 14 July the Government published a call for evidence as part of Professor Harrington's second independent review of the WCA.

The call for evidence is particularly interested in views and evidence about:
- the implementation of Professor Harrington's Year 1 recommendations and the impact they are having;
- what, if any, further work is required in future reviews; and
- the face-to-face assessment.

The call for evidence runs until 16 September. May I encourage Ms Voljeti, to contribute to this process.

I hope this is helpful.

With best wishes,

Rt Hon Chris Grayling MP
Minister for Employment