To think there will be more cases like this one? Errol Graham, starved to death.

[BillHadersNewWife]

www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-51283186

Mr. Graham had his benefits stopped and despite having genuine problems was left alone to starve.

www.disabilitynewsservice.com/the-death-of-errol-graham-man-starved-to-death-after-dwp-wrongly-stopped-his-benefits/?fbclid=IwAR2eRG_-He70F0dQ9tlHzysRvoLijGdROWhM94pn58cmDPclIxTJgVwEwwg

It's absolutely sickening and worrying.

GEE. Totally agree. My question is how you get that medical information when the person refuses to engage with either DWP or their own GP?

Do you think someone who has found an epilepsy medication which decreases the frequency and severity of their seizures enough for them to consider work or study should be deemed well enough to work and have their benefits reduced?

Because that would be someone who has "improved", in that they have fewer seizures than they used to because of the medication they take. These people are at real risk of having benefits tskennaway just because they found a medication that seems to work (for a while).

Or you mean WITH medication and other forms of treatment continuously throughout life they can get to a point where they could pursue employment and the such?

Just to add on getting any other type of therapy can be a nightmare. My husband has schizophrenia which is a bloody horrible disease, he takes tablets that's it no CPN no extra help, nothing. Last time he got ill we just had to double his tablets a week and manage best we could. He works on/off depending on his health, a lot of his trade means working away sometimes he can manage a few month before his head starts going and paranoia starts ramping up.

(Not slagging any MH services or workers off its down to funding cuts)

GEE. That’s for their GP to recommend. Our friends son had severe epilepsy which meant he had to give up his studies. It’s now 6+ years since he had a seizure, he’s driving and just gone to university so, yes, in some cases it’s possible for people to improve.

Dorsetdays its fascinating watching someone tying themselves in knots to defend the indefensible.

The reality is also that this sort of medication reduces your life expectancy. Lithium more so.

Max. How exactly am I tying myself in knots 🤣

That’s for their GP to recommend

OH RLY.

So since you now agree that the GP is the best person to say who can and who cannot work, you'll also agree we could save a shit load of money by closing down these assessment centres and liaising directly with GPs if there are queries about someone's medical or mental health condition.

By everything you post, Dorsetdays. Anf a little passive aggressive crying laughing emoji doesn't alter that. What you're defending isn't a good look btw.

It's a bit like the emoji that Alistair Stewart posted that effectively lost him his job.

Troll: "be careful Alistair, people might not realise that ape comment is Shakespeare and assume racist intent

Alistair:

GEE. Yes, agreed but you still haven’t addressed the issue of how that information is obtained when this man refused to engage with the DWP or his GP.

Where do you get the information from then?

As I said, as a GP, if I am asked for information about a patient I haven't seen for years, I'd try and contact the patient to come in for an appointment if I felt it necessary. In most cases, I for one will not think that the person with this diagnosis could have improved significantly enough to justify a reduction in benefits so I won't need to contact them regardless of when I last saw them. You don't grow out of bipolar or schizophrenia. The only thing you do is manage it with medication and therapy and that isn't being "well" that is being "stable" or having a "controlled condition".

If they refuse to attend an appointment that I have set up AND I know they have a mental health issue, that is proof enough that they aren't well enough to get less money in benefits.

If I cannot get hold of them at all, I'd probably contact their next of kin to check they are okay and/or inform authorities (police or SS).

So we’re in agreement then that the GP in this particular situation is more at fault than the DWP...because they did none of those things. Which was my original point - that the blame cannot be laid solely at the door of the DWP.

And how do you deal with patients who refuse to engage when you try to contact them and therefore you can’t provide the up to date medical information that is required? Bearing in mind that their NOK don’t appear to have done anything to escalate this to the authorities and if the police or SS had turned up he wouldn’t have engaged with them either (or if he had they would have seen a man who insisted he was fine)?

So we’re in agreement then that the GP in this particular situation is more at fault than the DWP...because they did none of those things

You have no understanding of the process at all, do you? You think the DWP contacted this mans GP before cutting off his money? No, they didnt. It's a case of didnt attend appointment or get in contact, money stopped and that's that.

Max. No, and I didn’t say that. My comment was to GEE who stated that, as a GP, if one of their patients wasn’t engaging with the surgery they would keep trying to make contact and if unable to they would notify NOK, police and social services

This mans GP did none of those things. They hadn’t issued any prescriptions to him for five years despite knowing he required medication.

It would have made zero difference if DWP had contacted his GP as they knew nothing about him or his current situation. That’s kind of the point

He was failed at several points but mainly by his own family and his GP.

This mans GP did none of those things.

Do you think the DWP contact someones GP? They dont

So how would the GP know that the DWP needed information about a patient/claimant?

Dorsetdays You are Jacob Grease Smugg/Evil McVey/Iain DunkedIn Shit and I claim my £5 even though they will take it out of my benefits more than likely

^You haven’t actually answered the question, stoneofdestiny, but rather skirted round it

I think you will see I gave an answer, a very specific one.

their food supply!^

No your original response did not answer the question because if the police had broken down his door before his benefits had been cut off they would not have found a person close to starvation.

Your new response is better in that the police would have found a reclusive man who would probably been in a state of extreme distress at having had his door stoved in. I'm not sure what they were supposed to do then though?

So we’re in agreement then that the GP in this particular situation is more at fault than the DWP...because they did none of those things. Which was my original point - that the blame cannot be laid solely at the door of the DWP.

Yes it can. If they didn't stop his benefits based on their assumption that someone with his diagnosis (or lack thereof) can improve enough to warrant a significant decrease is benefits, he probably would have used the money he was receiving to stay alive.

And how do you deal with patients who refuse to engage when you try to contact them and therefore you can’t provide the up to date medical information that is required?

This assumes that the DWP need "up to date" information. They don't in most cases, they just need the information they already have "THIS PERSON HAS A CHRONIC LIFELONG CONDITION". If they do have any queries, they can contact their GP who in most cases, will be able to answer said queries without seeing the patient just to assess. If they feel assessment is necessary and they cannot successfully have an appointment with the patient, one can safely assume their mental or physical health condition is also an obstacle to employment.

Move away from the idea that sick people HAVE to get well to be good or deserving of help. Have you heard of Parson's Sick Role Theory?

The reason I would get hold of NoK and/or authorities if I couldn't locate a patient isn't so the DWP have contemporaneous information about them, it would be to ascertain their welfare!

This man was staying alive and having some quality of life with or without recommended medication before they stopped his benefits. That's what we know. After they stopped his benefits, he starved to death. Even if his GP did rightly respect his decision to refrain from recommended medication, he wouldn't have starved to death if they continued his benefit and if the GP could have been the one to make conclusions about his suitability for employment. Once they realised he hadn't taken medication for years and that he refused to engage, the GP would have no choice but to a) say he needs ongoing DLA/PIP/ESA so that would sort out DWP and b) try and address his health needs.

“Graphista I'm your new best friend forever. Brilliant post. I had to step away earlier myself.” Aww thank you.

HelenaDove my friend you are so right, they want it all ways and continue to fail to see that a callous, compassionless society hurts everyone -‘ not least because as a pp pointed out it’s more expensive long term!

If I’d had the help & support I needed at the beginning of me getting a diagnosis I feel confident it’s likely I’d be working and contributing to society now rather than still needing help & support.

If the strongest criticism you can come up with is you don’t like use of capitals you’ve clearly lost the argument.

And medication is rarely the answer with mh issues, certainly not the only answer!

I’m on my 5th antidepressant. Some haven’t had any effect at all, some the effect wore off, some made me more ill, some I developed bad reactions to.

I’m currently stuck on mirtazipine which is doing nothing for me, but it’s dangerous physically and mentally to come off it without support which I don’t as I said currently have.

I have severe ocd - literally everything I do involves a ritual that takes at least 15 mins. Ocd is not curable, the thinking is that you’re born with it and that certain factors can make it worsen over time. With hindsight it’s obvious to me and those close to me that I’ve always had it, but following a trauma I deteriorated badly and had a psychotic experience and the crisis team were called in. This has happened again a few times since.

I’ve had lots of therapy, cbt supposedly the gold standard for ocd actually made me worse. Meds I have already said what’s been happening there.

At no point have I had the support & help that is what’s considered the best way to reach a point where someone with ocd can function relatively normally - good psychotherapy, meds that work and additional regular support for the work guided by the psychotherapy.

I have at times begged to be sectioned/admitted and been refused, sometimes because they didn’t feel it was what was best for me but sometimes they’ve admitted because there simply weren’t any beds free at the local unit.

“You have no understanding of the process at all, do you? You think the DWP contacted this mans GP before cutting off his money? No, they didnt. It's a case of didnt attend appointment or get in contact, money stopped and that's that.” Exactly

If the dwp had contacted the gp maybe that would have prompted the gp to check up on him?

I somewhat agree the gp is not blameless but cutting off someone known to have a history of serious illness’s (of whatever kind) ONLY source of income is disgraceful. There’s absolutely no reasonable justification for that.

CecilyP

Your post is unclear - but the one point you make about what the police were meant to do is answered way up thread.

Even bailiffs check around a house to see what is worth selling and would have seen the dire state of empty cupboards etc!

StoneofDestiny, your post still relates to the situation found by the baliffs after Graham had died.

If the police had forced entry the previous October before any benefits had been cut off, they presumably would not have found empty cupboards at all. They would just have found someone living quietly but obviously distressed at having their door stoved in.

This assumes that the DWP need "up to date" information. They don't in most cases, they just need the information they already have "THIS PERSON HAS A CHRONIC LIFELONG CONDITION". If they do have any queries, they can contact their GP who in most cases, will be able to answer said queries without seeing the patient just to assess. If they feel assessment is necessary and they cannot successfully have an appointment with the patient, one can safely assume their mental or physical health condition is also an obstacle to employment.

But this is exactly what happened in the case of Margaret Fleming (a girl with serious learning difficulties who would never be able to work) whose benefits continued to be paid for 16 years after she had been murdered by her so-called carers. For how many years can someone be regarded as a doctor's patient if they are on their books but the doctor hasn't seen them. There has to be some kind of checks and balances rather than paying out money indefinely, though I would agree that more could be set up to try to stop this tragic situation happening again.

If the GP was the one to decide that the man is not well enough to come off of disability benefits and not someone at a DWP assessment office, he would have likely had money to eat like he was before.

The only reason this happened is because of the system we have of issuing andnaustaijig disability benefits. If we changed the system, it wouldn't have happened.

But let's play Tory's advocate and assume that the GP could not get the man to come to a random "check up" after noticing he wasn't compliant with the recommended treatment plans and did get the police to go around the door. It is likely that the man's refusal to engage with authorities even to establish his wellbeing would have made up part of an overall assessment which would conclude that his mental health is poor and untreated. This information should be sufficient for the DWP to continue his benefits without seeing him. He is obviously unwell.