Seven medals but now they want my benefits.

[carernotasaint]

blacktrianglecampaign.org/2012/08/28/seven-medals-but-now-the-tories-want-my-benefits-british-paralympic-gold-medalist-tara-flood-speaks-out/

this thread is going to go the same way as the mobility scooterthread

The Americans tried wiping out Native Americans with a eugenics programme, that was widely copied by the Third Reich.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization

A lot of the following still have legislation in place:

Eugenics programs including forced sterilization existed in most Northern European countries, as well as other more or less Protestant countries. Some programs, such as Canada's and Sweden's, lasted well into the 1970s. Other countries that had notably active sterilisation programmes include Denmark, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Switzerland, Iceland, and some countries in Latin America (including Panama)

and it is a big story when you know how many of the atos offices are not accesable

Btw, I agree the headline of that article is overblown and ahead of itself.

But the issue of inappropriate assessments is very real, and damaging a disabled person near you right now.

Tommorrows Independent front page.

p.twimg.com/A1afObdCYAAanRN.png

Comedian Mark Steels take on the subject.

www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/mark-steel/mark-steel-they-cant-be-disabled--they-can-swim-8084638.html

Thank you carer

ATOS are a big bag of wank.

That said, claimants should be re-assessed especially if they have been on IB for years and years and years because, often people do get better. If it is clear their condition wont improve then they should be given help and not just re-assessed every 6months in the hope their arms grow back.

Claimants on IB were reassessed regularly.

I used to get done every 2 years or so, proportionate to my condition which usually improves eventually. I think some people with conditions that don't get better may have had lifetime awards once they'd reached a certain stage of deterioration.

It's always a horrid process filling in the forms, because for all your workarounds you can't conceal the fact there's a long list of work-essential things you can't do any more. But I did use to have confidence that it was a neutral process designed to produce an honest assessment.

Since the ATOS computerised assessment came in, I feel I have to advocate for "being ill". I've twice had IB/ESA stopped and then reinstated, including when I was at my most ill. I was put on 6 month assessments, and dropped again to 2 years when I met a sensible assessor. Now that I'm getting better, I am ironically much better able to present a case and challenge mistakes, so more likely to be awarded benefit...

My dh has a lifetime condition, as do my dcs. They are and always have been, reassessed on a regular basis.

This is not new, introduced by the labour government to assess disability claims - I do not see why this is wrong

Well the woman in the article has no hands and lower arms. Does she really need to be assesed every year or two to see if they have grown back? That's your tax money being spent.

My disability is suposed to be on the list of those that are not reassessed but they still reassess me. My consultant tells me I will not get better but I have to be assessed by someone who does not know me.

I agree that some people should be reassessed, but limbs do not grow back.

That Mark Steel article is brilliant

Because, as the old saying goes, if you can pat a hamster you can do an all night shift as a security guard.

Quite.

Maybe Atos will get itself in a complete philosophical tangle during the games, applauding each event, then thinking, "Hang on, they can't be disabled, they've just been playing basketball", until the entire Paralympic village is disqualified, unless one country enters a couple of dead athletes, giving them a 40 per cent chance of being accepted into the table tennis.

Nobody has told the woman in the article that her benefit is to be stopped, and in all probability it will not be stopped either. Non-article.

The issue with reassessment is that every time it's carried out it's another chance to get it wrong. DS1 was awarded higher rate care aged 3, then higher rate mobility as well age 5. That was renewed for a number of times on a three year cycle until someone sensible obviously decided that his severe learning disabilities are for life and he's not going to suddenly not need 24 hour care, or be able to magically walk down the street unaccompanied. He can still be reassessed at any time that DWP choose, but money isn't being wasted by checking every 3 years to see whether some sort of miracle has occurred that I've forgotten to mention.

I presume at 16 he'll move into the clutches of Atos. DS1's problem is that he looks entirely 'normal' so some thick people organisations like Atos tend to think he could talk if he just tried a bit harder, or was smacked a bit by his parents and therefore why should he get DLA. After all he does't look severely disabled, he must just not be trying hard enough.

I plan to turn up ten minutes early then ask the office staff or assessor to look after him while I pop to the loo, that should do the trick. Usually 2 adults accompany ds1 to any appointments, believe me our Atos appointment will be attended by only one of us.

And Atos are losing 40% of appeals - they're getting a lot wrong!

ATOS assessed me. They decided that my uncontrolled epilepsy didn't mean that I kept my disability benefits.

I lost all the money that helped TOWARDS the extra costs I incur through my disability. That disability has not gone, has not changed, is still affecting my life to the point where I would be unable to hold down a job, the expenses incurred through having that disability haven't decreased just because the Government no longer gives me money to help towards those costs.

THIS is why people like me and carernotasaint are aghast at the changes to the welfare system.

Because I could bend down to pick a pencil up, and raise both arms over my head, I was assessed as fit to work by ATOS, who completely ignored the advice from my Neurologist stating that he would NEVER sign me as fit for FT work, and he would have serious concerns about my disability worsening to the point where I was unable to care for myself if he signed me as fit for PT work. The only tests they did was a tick box test that was completely irrelevant to someone with epilepsy, or any other Neurological condition or MH issues, and ask me to bend down and pick up a pencil and raise my arms above my head. Makes no reference to the fact that after a seizure I need to sleep for 5 hours+, that I am incapable of working for around 24 hours after a seizure, that working puts so much strain on my body that even on the maximum dose of TWO anti epilepsy drugs (AED's), my epilepsy worsens rapidly and severely, and the side effects I get from having to take higher doses of AED's than when I am out of work also impact very badly on my quality of life.

When you live day in, day out, with the after effects of losing your disability benefits because ATOS have wrongly assessed you as being fit for work by using a totally irrelevant test, then maybe you get some rights to criticise people like carernotasaint who is just trying to raise awareness. She has been on MN for a long time, she posts on plenty of other threads that aren't about ATOS and the Welfare reform bill too.

So, she just posted a link. So that might seem 'lazy' to you. If you were caring 24/7 for someone else, yet still trying to raise awareness too, wouldn't YOU be guilty of 'lazy' posting very occasionally, if your Internet was playing up?!

And yes, I can't bring myself to watch the Paralympics due to the immense irony of it being sponsored by ATOSsers.

It is in the interests of ATOS to do as many assessments as often possible. They get paid each time. They are a company. Their mission is not to care, it is to make money. They are 15 yrs old and worth about 7bn.
It doesn't matter that we all know someone's limbs will not grow back. The appointment will be made, forms filled and more of our money will end up in the hands of big business. It stinks, but this sort of thing seems to be happening all the time now.

Btw, ATOS are now bidding for UK government contracts in other areas.

They're a French software company. They got the medical assessment contract by providing the computerised check-box questionnaire. Then they hired nurses and a smaller number of doctors to populate the database with assessments.

They're now seeking other government contracts in unrelated areas - trying to move into the territory occupied by Serco and G4S of " fulfilling government contracts" as their core business. Doesn't matter what the contract is for - they just hire front-end people to do the actual work.

This is why Serco collect bins, run schools, carry out OH medicals and own prisons. The only common thread is that they're farming taxpayers' money.

Not being stupid, ATOS have crossed the channel looking for a piece of that.

They're discussing ATOS's involvement in the Paralympics on the Wright Stuff now.

Steve from Fife is very angry about them but very controlled.

The next caller is saying: 'well, where I live the disabled are really well cared for...'

I despair.

ATOS-bashing continues on the Wright Stuff. Kaye Adams is a little uncomfortable with it.

Kaye: 'But what about the Paralympics as an inspiring event?'

The new caller who has severe epilepsy is persisting about their disgraceful treatment of him.

Kaye Adams: 'I hear what you say John, sorry to have to cut you off...'

Hi, we're going to move this to In the News. Thanks.

Thanks, limited, can't bring myself to listen to it live...

All I'm seeing is that a disabled person who is/was in the paralympics is having to be reassessed just like every other disabled person.

What's wrong with that? Should we treat her differently just because she won some medals? Surely THAT would be wrong?

The rules are a mess in my opinion and the tests flawed. But that's a different issue to exempting some because they can win gold medals and set world records.