DWP-Related-Suicide Rate Increasing?

I seem to remember on one occasion a spokesman for the DWP, (possibly a Minister, but they seem to change fairly frequently now) referring to warnings about increasing mental health problems associated with the WCA, and dangerous effects on the vulnerable that could ‘tip them over’, contempuously dismissing such ideas as ‘scaremongering’. In the typical reverse-logic of an abuser, they went on to claim that it is the ‘scaremongering’ which is the problem, since it is it that is causing people anxiety and worse, not the actual process they’re being forced to go through.  Let’s examine that idea for a moment through the lens of common sense…

They were claiming that notions of fear, undoubtably anxiety-provoking though its accepted they can be (especially when suffering mental health problems) have a more deleterious effect than being told you are fit when you’re not, and having the only support, (and other support that is contingent on that status) removed, leaving you extraordinarily vulnerable, your only hope to obtain work that you are patently not confident of being able to do, in a time of high unemployment. Fear can be deadly, yes, when it comes to suicide-ideation. But the actuation of that fear, the bearing it out in the actual circumstances you are thrown into against your will, is the real killer.

I’ve become apprehensive about what I’m going to see on social media daily now. In this latest case, which follows on quite soon after that of Tim Salter, there can be no doubt about what caused Shaun Pilkington to shoot himself, as there was similarly no doubt about what caused Tim to hang himself, and no doubt about why Stephanie Bottrill walked onto the motorway that day. I’m glad that the Mirror described Stephanie as a suicide ‘victim’, because that’s what these people are – victims. And to all intents and purposes they are increasing at a disturbing rate. It’s such a high price for our society to pay for this pushing through of a patently contrived, ideologically driven ‘process’ that has been designed for no other purpose than to facilitate the ‘culling of benefits’, by a government which not only lacks concern for its most disempowered citizens, but appears to view their lives as dispensable in the context of their ruthless savaging of ‘welfare’.

All three victims noted above were already impaired in some way health-wise, already at a disadvantage in an employment market which with sickening predictability demands that potential employees be  ‘flexible’, ‘energetic’ and ‘willing to give 110%’. But they were also all in their fifties, a demographic group historically disadvantaged in the labour market against the young, who are viewed as more malleable, more willing and less likely to succumb to illness by potential employers. Doubly disadvantaged then. And isn’t that the profound shamefulness of these policies, that they are targetting those who have compound disadvantage, the most vulnerable  of all of us?

Advertisement

MIND film captures misery of WCA for those struggling with Mental Health

 

 

Tyneside MIND have produced this compelling account of what it’s like for those suffering mental health issues to have to undergo the unforgiving, indifferent and humiliating ordeal that is the DWP’s Work Capability Assessment. For those who have been through that experience or who are currently experiencing that kind of vulnerability, viewing may not be advisable, but it is very important that material like this is disseminated widely to counter the government’s unsupportable claims of legitimacy for their WCA process.

MIND’s Campaign page associated with this film, where you can sign to hear about this and other campaigns can be found here.

Londonderry Man in Permanent Vegative State Asked If He Is Fit For Work

My attention was drawn to this case reported on the BBC News website, the latest to come to light regarding the DWP’s assault on the sick and disabled . Its one of the more extreme examples, concerning a young man from Londonderry whose family have had to deal with ‘enquiries’ about their son’s ‘fitness’ by the Social Security Agency. They still use the more apt term ‘social security’over there apparently, while the rest of the UK has been indoctrinated to adopt more work-oriented descriptions for this kind of support. Their son is in a permanent vegative state following a gang attack, suffering severe brain injuries that require round-the-clock care. This has not prevented the Agency from repeatedly sending him forms to fill in for ESA assessment. Not content with the family’s original comprehensive response, which included his specialist neurosurgeon and GP’s report, they then sent out a second form.

“There is a lot of trauma for the family and it’s not eased when forms like this really rub salt in the wounds.”

What struck me in the usual response that the Agency gave to the BBC was the familiar expression that they are “unable to comment on individual cases”. We are so used to seeing this statement that we never question its validity. It is the same opening line you will get if you write to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, or any of the personnel responsible for these processes. It has the ring of ‘plausible deniability’ about it. It sounds plausible, and allows them to erect a shield of deniability around any individual’s case, implying that there is some rule (akin to data protection) preventing them from commenting. But that’s rubbish isn’t it? Because families and patients (victims) everywhere are commenting like billyo, all over the place, and at every possible opportunity. So its just part of the scam that allows them to do whatever they want, make as many mistakes as they want, cause as much damage as they want, and simply get away with it.

Atos: “Leave Your Clinical Skills, (and Your Principles) at the Door”

Deputy Medical Director of Sally’s Atos Centre:

 “You’d better throw your principles out the window otherwise you won’t be able to work here.”

 

 My previous post outlined my conclusion that Atos acts as a ‘shield’ for the government, and that by having them as a ‘middle man’ between claimants and the DWP facilitates the deflection of criticism that should rightly be aimed at warped government policies. In this recording for LBC Radio Sally, a former Atos employee, describes her experience with that ‘horrendous organisation’, which she alleges cares as little for its employees as it does the vulnerable people pushed through its WCA process.

Clinical skills not required

This timely appearance of a radio interview with ex-Atos nurse ‘Sally’ goes a long way towards validating my assertion. Sally is yet another ‘whistleblower’ emerging from this firm, and her testimony is even more damning of the bad practice that is rife within, indeed is deliberately built into, their process. It is one she describes as being factory-like, with

“…no regard for your clinical skills…and most of the people who go there haven’t got any because they’ve been out of practice for so long.”

For example most GPs occupied in an Atos role, she asserts, are “…retired or semi-retired, nearing their time…”. Considering the high remuneration for doctors taking up these positions its not unreasonable to suppose that many facing retirement might see it as somewhat of a ‘pension booster’.

 Aside from GPs she criticises the substandard quality of many of the (highly paid) doctors who tend in one way or another to be among the less competent, or less experienced, of medical professionals. This, she says, is because the majority (estimated by her as between 90-95%) are foreign nationals unable to secure NHS employment, or who have failed exams that might qualify them to work legitimately in our healthcare system.

Fiddling the data

Sally also confirms previous allegations about how ratios are set, the ‘targets’ that pre-determine how many claimants should go into each group, so that considerable file ‘juggling’ must be done to make sure those targets are kept to. That revelation met with a gasp of shock by the interviewer, she goes on to say “If you didn’t get those figures right, within your file, then there was repercussions on you…”, and likely ‘disciplinary’ action taken. Its glaringly obvious to anyone that if you’re working to targets you’re not authentically assessing the patient, you’re focusing instead on how people’s data can be manipulated to fit the rigid categories set for you. If you’re led by that then you can’t possibly be led by the evidence in front of you, the claimant’s unique health circumstances.

 The part most relevant to my post, however, is when she questions why the DWP does not employ the doctors and nurses directly, a common sense idea, which, considering the huge profits creamed off by Atos, would be more economically sound.

I think the answer to that is now plainly clear.

It is clear too, that those medical professionals employed by Atos are not there for utilisation of their medical skills, but merely to lend an aura of respectability to a process that has no medical legitimacy, nor even medical relevance, whatsoever.

Worsening of Mental Health, Self Harm and Suicides Directly Attributable to WCA

Investigative news outfit Exaro have revealed that a recent survey commissioned by mental health charity ‘Rethink Mental Illness‘ demonstrates the devastating effect that the, now notorious, Work Capability Assessment is having on the sick and disabled across the country. Of a thousand GPs surveyed it was reported that 6% had disabled patients who had either attempted, or actually committed, suicide due to the distress the process is causing. One in five (21%) revealed that they had patients who have considered suicide in connection with the WCA, either as a result of undergoing it, or fear of having to. 14% of GPs also confirmed self harming behaviour among patients forced to undergo the Atos administered test.

“These shocking statistics show that the work-capability assessment is pushing some of the most unwell and vulnerable people in our society to the edge.” – Paul Jenkins, chief executive, Rethink Mental Health.

Further, Rethink’s survey indicates that not only is the WCA exacerbating  ill-heath for those with existing mental health problems, such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, but

“More than eight out of ten GPs say they have patients who have developed mental health problems due to [the] controversial benefits test” [italics added]

Only ‘Anecdotal’  

an·ec·do·tal [an-ik-doht-l, an-ik-doht-l]
adjective
based on personal observation, case study reports, or random investigations rather than systematic scientific evaluation”

Attempts to undermine the vast amounts of incriminating evidence discrediting the WCA include comments such as this by Conservative MSP Alex Johnstone reported in the Daily Record:

“But many of the stories we have heard are anecdotal. It is difficult to find a statistical or empirical set of figures to tell us exactly what these problems are.”

Is this survey ‘statistical’ and ’empirical’ enough for those such as Mr Johnstone? Or will they find some other means of dismissing the facts? There is material which has been expressly designed for just that purpose, including the means by which GPs and other doctors’ authority can be undermined or dismissed. It can be found among the output from proponents of the BioPsychoSocial model of illness, and adherents to the ‘Wessely’ psychogenic doctrine.

A Clarification About ‘Work’

Someone commented on my last post regarding what they perceive to be my encouragement of a negative perspective to work for the sick and disabled, which they evidently feel could deter others from attempting to work, something which has been beneficial for them personally. Since comments are not viewable unless you click on them on here, I am repeating my response to them .

My previous post was not denying that work plays an important part in our lives, or that it can make a valuable contribution to our self esteem. In a broad sense, that is, as in my long working history I have experienced both sides of that coin. Some jobs actively undermine self worth and health, but some as you say challenge us in positive ways and help us develop both socially and personally, developing relationships and skills that enhance our lives. There is probably nothing better for our self esteem than to experience ourselves as useful, purposeful beings, in an environment where our efforts are valued and rewarded appropriately. The potential beneficial effects of work I expect to be taken as a ‘given’ in my writing about this subject. But that piece is not about whether or not work is good for us.

It is about the cynical misappropriation of that idea to quite different ends than those which are claimed by Professor Aylward and his colleagues, and subsequently our government. There is a great deal more history to this situation than I have been able to cover in the two pieces I have written on the subject.

I am merely trying to highlight certain important factors that have played a part in a process which, if you have read any of my other posts, is having  a devastating effect on sick and disabled people in this country. The horrifying cases continue to mount daily. In a sense my piece is not even about that. It is a direct challenge to Professor Aylward’s claim to have no involvement in this. I hope you would see that his denial of his involvement and attempt to distance himself from the huge part he has played in it is convincing proof of how toxic these ‘reforms’, in particular the Work Capability Assessment, are.

That the most influential person, the one who has been singularly instrumental in propagating the ideas (on a worldwide scale) which they have been constructed upon, attempts to extricate himself, that surely is validation enough. The WCA is a fraud. Even the most superficial investigation such as mine exposes its bias, and its hidden agenda. The effects, which should be the final determiner of whether a process is successful in its (asserted beneficial) aims, prove that conclusively. People are dying after being found fit, others are being driven to suicide, certainly many more are living in fear and desperation. This is not sensationalising the situation it is the plain truth.

I am glad that you have not suffered too much from your WCA experience, and have managed to obtain work which has restored your self esteem. That can not be said to be generally true I’m afraid. That a few may escape the ill effects can in no way justify the many who are being brutalised by this process.

Purple Persuasion’s Blog: “And The Score From Glasgow is..Nil Points”.

I can’t say I ever intended my blog to contain example after example of outrageous WCA ‘decisions’, or if so I intended to do it in a much more scholarly way, collect and collate data and so on, within its own secton of the site. I can’t seem to muster that degree of discipline of late. I would attribute that to my mental health issues, except that according to Atos Healthcare I don’t have any.

So, occasionally I do post some of the worst stories that I come across, courtesy of activists who are blogging and tweeting more conscientously on this very aspect, and of course the items that by their extreme nature actually make it into, if not mainstream news, the regional variety which serves that particular victim’s locality.

This latest is Ms W’s personal account, and I’m posting it because I relate strongly to her experience which seems to typify the Atos approach to mental health assessment. I say that because not only is this account similar to my own, but to many others that I have seen online. Assuming that we were not all assessed by the same aberrant ‘HCP’ it can only be concluded that this is their preferred protocol for that area of health.

One definitive aspect of this shared experience, which it is not easy to admit to in our stiff-upper-lipped society is of having ‘broken down’ and wept at the assessment, but then to have been supposedly observed to have, in my case, “Coped well at interview”, despite strong evidence to the contrary. That simple untruth, together with a recorded absence of any cringemakingly described and potentially sectionable behaviour such as “sweating, trembling or rocking backwards and forwards” are apparently the only things needed to disqualify a claimant in that area.

I’m not much given to the humiliating experience of public weeping, though the way in which I was interrogated at my subsequent tribunal stimulated much the same result, which, too, was similarly dismissed as irrelevant to my claim to mental ill-health. They must have just had me pegged as an unecessary ‘weeper’, though I tend to think of myself as much more of a survivor, and somewhat of a warrior, when I am in good health. Personal history has no place in the WCA.

But, this is not about me. This is Ms W’s account of receiving the regulation ‘Nil points’ following her assessment by Atos despite suffering what appears to be quite severe Bipolar Disorder. Well that’s what we lay(wo)men might conclude. The ‘disability experts’ at Atos certainly have a, shall we say, less conventional,  perspective on what makes a person ‘fit for work’.

An extract from Ms W’s account:

The Decision Maker notes my ESA50 explanation that I am not always aware of everyday hazards due to my sedating medication, that when I am manic I can do things without thinking, and that when I am depressed I can barely get out of bed. However, because I said at WCA that I was able to wash and dress unaided that week, had my own bank account and could meet a friend for coffee most weeks, and because in the HCP’s opinion my mental state examination “was within normal limits”, I was given nil points. What I find particularly disturbing is that I sobbed throughout most of the assessment, and was visibly anxious and distressed. This is evidently what Atos considers being in a “normal” mental state.

Evidently, Ms W, evidently.

Nil Points…

Nil Points… The WCA – Like a perverted Eurovison Song Contest, only no-one’s singing and dancing… mainly they’re being driven into destitution, or suicide, or simply dying while being ‘found’ fit.

The BBC seem to be catching up a bit of late, hopefully not too late, although it certainly is for a growing number of victims of Atos. There can no longer be any doubt that many have been driven to suicide by this government’s ‘welfare reforms’ in the area of health-related benefits. A recent news item on the BBC site is yet another in a never-ending torrent of evidence that the WCA is not only ‘not fit for purpose’ but is clearly a bureaucratic instrument designed to deny people their legitimate benefits. I no longer believe its simply about saving money. I believe its an ideological assault on the vulnerable, which has much in common with that of a more notorious historical regime. The parallels are striking, couched though they might be in a discourse more acceptable to modern consciences. This time instead of smearing all sick and disabled people, and being encouraged to regard them as ‘useless eaters’, we are invited to discriminate between the ‘deserving’ and ‘undeserving’ sick and disabled. Once you establish that premise and install a bureaucratic system which finds the majority ‘underserving’, and then widely publish these distorted results in the mainstream press, you have paved the way for the wholescale demonisation of a community. Because ‘the public’ respond to messages, the same now as they did historically. And the overriding message for them has been that you can’t trust this sector of the population. The seeds of doubt have been sown in the minds of the ‘advantaged’, those who have no struggle with impairments in carrying out their daily lives. To the abject shame of our society the politics of resentment has been stirred up and aimed squarely at the vulnerable.

There is much denial that this is an offensive against the sick and disabled, with the utilisation of concepts created by disabled campaigners themselves, originally for the purpose of  overturning negative social preconceptions.  Now those concepts are being used against them in true Orwellian fashion, almost as if the government are saying “Well you claimed you could contribute to society, you claimed you could work, now get off your arses and do so, because we are not going to support you anymore”.  Or as Grayling prefers to spin it “identify people who can do more with their lives and give them the help they need to find their way back to work”, something that counter-intuitively will be facilitated by giving them less money rather than more, apparently.

More realistically, as disabled journalist Mark Sparrow put it earlier this year, these ‘reforms’ have compounded the disadvantage, as he writes: “Chris Grayling you’ve made me financially, as well as physically disabled”

To return to the most recently exposed victim of this system, Cecilia Burns received ‘Nil points’ at her WCA, despite the fact that she was still undergoing treatment for breast cancer. The government accordingly reduced her benefit by £30 per week. After fighting against the decision her ESA was reinstated shortly before her death. So this woman who had been enduring cancer, and enduring the side effects of treatment for it, was made to do so with less money, and had to spend the last months of her life in a pointless struggle to regain what she had been entitled to all along. Nil points to you Mr Grayling, and your immoral system, nil points.

 

The Abomination That Is The WCA: Excuses, Excuses…

The government’s whole defence of the abomination that is the WCA rests on the argument that they wish to counter a defeatist attitude among the sick and disabled. That people have ‘given up’ on finding work. Anyone who has ever worked while sick with ‘commonplace’ ailments, for example when in the early stages of flu or an acute hay fever attack, or perhaps coming back to work after a fairly bad sprain, can see what a flimsy notion this is. Sick and disabled people have far, far worse barriers to overcome than those examples. Sick and disabled people by definition are anything but defeatist, since they have to put extra effort into their daily lives to compensate for their continuing physical/mental disadvantages. The ‘defeated’ sick/disabled person would not still be here, since they would have taken measures to end their struggles.

While Mr Grayling can only whine pathetically “But they can do some work” most sick and disabled people are already doing more than the ‘able-bodied’ just to function in everyday life. This is so intuitively true that I think its why some of the uninformed general public go straight to the ‘scrounger’ stereotype as a an explanation for people being kicked off benefits. They know that sick and disabled people genuinely have greater hurdles to contend with, because we have all experienced illness and understand the limitations it brings. Its not difficult to project that knowledge into a situation where you don’t recover, you don’t feel better. Like a case of permanent flu or a sprain which doesn’t heal (I’m deliberately using understated examples here in order to tap into common experiences of how illness affects someone’s capacity to work). So they have to cognitively dismiss the notion that genuinely sick and disabled people are being denied benefits and move on to something which makes more sense to them. Its the way our brains work, we reject ideas that don’t fit into our existing understanding about the world. Thus they skip over to the much more satisfying and fair notion that claimants are not really ill in the first place.

Secondly, and this is proven by Mr Grayling’s admission that he is not interested in ‘real world’ situations when it comes to bullying people with physical/mental impairments into jobseeking, is the complete denial of how ‘impairment unfriendly’ the contemporary uk workplace is. It is this way because of the intensification of work, because employers are focused on getting ever more out of workers while simultaneously finding ways of reducing their pay or any security of tenure of a job, so they can be dismissed according to the demands of the workload.

Imagine for a minute a sick or disabled person who is already physically disadvantaged attempting to not only overcome their personal impairments in daily maintenance, but also struggling to deal with the volume/pace of work most people are faced with these days. Imagine also the impact on a person striving to overcome psychological impairments who is subjected to the impermanence of unstable serial employment in highly stressed profit-driven work. Riding the two horses of benefits and work simultaneously is a heavy burden for even the most able-bodied, involving a permanent focus on the constant readjustment of one’s ‘status’. While in employment this involves making sure tax is deducted fairly, as every new employee is subjected to ’emergency’ rate tax, the onus being on the worker to have this rectified. Back on benefits effort has to be put in to make sure that entitlements are reinstated correctly. The administering of all this can often seem like an extra job in itself.

So we have a group of people who are already having to put greater effort into basic daily self maintenance expected to draw upon even more personal resources to adapt to work conditions which challenge even the most able-bodied. Thats if they can even secure work in the most competitive job market this country has seen for decades, where university graduates compete for mcjobs, or waitering or cleaning jobs.Since barely any job can be said to be permanent these days those coming in to the job market ‘at the bottom’ are so unlikely to partake of the benefits that genuinely stable, fair employment bestows that it beggars belief that this argument is tendered by this government. But then again, they really have no convincing alternative argument than the flimsy, outdated, inaccurate notion that Work Is (inevitably) Good For You.

*I would just like to clarify that in the above I am referring to what most people would regard as the ‘mild to moderately’ sick and disabled. Those more extreme cases which are very well known to the online communities, examples of which were most recently exposed on TV’s respective Panorama and Dispatches programmes, are more accurately defined as serious state abuses which deserve the strongest repercussions for those behind this process.

Ex-Atos HCP exposes WCA’s bias against the sick

This January I wrote what turned out to be quite an extended piece about the conceptual basis underpinning the WCA; about the ideas that were pushed from certain quarters in order that the WCA could be carried out in the way it has been. Which has been towards the end of denying people their legitimate entitlement to health related benefits. It was published here on the International Green Socialist site , (*link no longer working, pdf available here) and attracted a large number of comments, many of which expanded on points and introduced material which the limitations of the article prohibited, such as the involvement of Big Insurance Company, Unum in these ‘reforms’ – to what they evidently anticipated would be their eventual gain.

One of the aspects of my analysis, that I thought very important to point out, was the glaring bias among the wide documentation underpinning the whole process, from Atos’ own advice to their ‘disability analysts’, to the government’s Employment and Support Allowance regulations, and even to guidelines for GPs assessing conditions. This bias which initially grabbed my attention through scrutinising my own and others’ WCA reports, expanded into a pattern permeating these other instruments/literature. The form it takes, that of deliberately undermining the claims a person makes about how their illness/disability affects their capacity to work, is to the discredit of  not only Atos, but also the DWP and the government.

It has been very gratifying, then, to come across this account by one of Atos’ ex Healthcare Professionals, which bears out my own, and others’, observations that the process underlying the WCA is a ‘sham’.

“I worked for Atos as a ‘disability analyst’ thinking I would be helping vulnerable people to access their benefits,” she said.

“I soon discovered that nothing could be further from the truth. The rules laid down by the bosses are designed to catch people out.”

Jean worked for Atos Healthcare in Scotland, but found she was unable to continue in a role which went against her professional, and personal, ethics.

“The job was making me sick,” she said. “It’s against my principles to treat people with long term illnesses in such a disgusting way, so I had to give it up.

“People go into those interviews and talk openly to you because you are a nurse and they trust you.

“Then your skills are used against them, to take away their benefits and destroy their lives.

“I can’t be a part of that.”

Its to be hoped that, similarly to the A4e scandal, more and more Atos Healthcare personnel will have the courage to tell the truth about this shameful process.