Thursday 3 October 2013

Intensive programs to deal with *that*...

The Conservatives have had their annual get together where they moan about how much they hate us benefit scroungers and lay out their plans to torture us just a little bit more.

Much noise was made about George Osborne's plan to make JobSeekers' Allowance claimants either attend the JobCentre every day or participate in a workfare scheme.

But a less talked about nugget of the plan is this:

Or alternatively, if you've got long-term problems like addictions or mental health issues, you will have to go on an intensive programme that deals with that.

From ITV



As we all sadly know; a great many people who are unable to work due to mental illness have, over the last few years, failed the WCA so been refused ESA and have been forced to claim JSA, despite being in no state to be job-seeking. And now it seems that people with health problems will be forced into potentially unsuitable treatment for their £71.70 a week.

A few years ago my right jaw joint crapped out. I have a bone disease so my joints are kinda crumbly. Last year I got told that that there was nothing wrong with my jaw and it was just depression. They wanted me to go for talking therapies as a treatment for my jaw pain.

About 6 months later someone finally bothered to take an x-ray of my jaw. Low and behold: There's a bloody great chunk of bone missing from my joint.

Now, my health problems are much more complicated than one little joint and I wouldn't be out of work for just one teeny joint (no matter how painful it can be at times). But lets hypothetically say I was on JSA because my jaw had made me lose my last job. It's possible. As a comedian my job depended on me being able to talk a lot. On some days that's really excruciating. I could have been forced to go through pointless counselling because at one point an idiot doctor decided to not look for physical evidence and proclaimed that my jaw pain was a mental health problem.

Now, in that example we're looking at forced treatment that's a complete waste of time and money, but ultimately harmless enough.

But some enforced treatments could be very dangerous indeed. Could you imagine someone with severe schizophrenia being sent to a barely-qualified counsellor? What about someone with Crohn's who has been misdiagnosed as bulimic by a doctor that won't listen and is then sanctioned by the DWP for not complying with their treatment when they - unsurprisingly - continue to throw up.

Forced treatment is a very dangerous route when you consider all the misdiagnosing that goes on. In fact: Forced treatment is pretty dangerous anyway. Last time I saw a neurologist about my migraines he prescribed a drug which prolonged my heart's QT interval. This can be fatal. If the DWP decided that I needed to get my migraines under control to make myself more employable and forced me to either take the drug the neurologist recommended or I'd be sanctioned and have no money for food; I might be dead by now.

Making people sign on every day is a waste of taxpayer's money. It will create havoc in JobCentres where they've barely got the staff to manage the current workload of people signing on once a fortnight. But this aspect of Gideon's 'Help to Work' program is downright dangerous.

27 comments:

  1. Before I go any further I should say I am no lawyer so this is pure amateurish speculation!
    As far as I am aware it is illegal except under very specific and controlled circumstances to force someone to take medical treatment against their will.
    I know that people will turn round and say that no one is being "forced" as they can simply "choose" not to claim the benefit. But when the choice is between complete destitution and medical treatment, then I think it becomes what is called "economic coercion", which is illegal.
    However people far more knowledgeable than myself would have to look into this and confirm my suspicions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Its a step back towards a draconian state where the working class are seen as scum and the lords of the manor just get away with it. dreadful policy.

      Delete
    2. It's also in fundamental contradiction of the medical principle of informed consent. Any medic of whatever persuasion who takes part in compelled treatment outside of the narrow grounds of someone sectioned under the Mental Health Act is stepping onto very thin ice and potentially laying themself open to ethics charges before their professional body. As far as I can see compelled treatment violates at least 3 clauses of the Declaration of Geneva (Doctor's Oath) and the other medical professions have similar ethical doctrines.
      Even if IDS were to make it technically legal, it may still be impossible for medics to participate, which raises the even more worrying likelihood of clueless amateurs trying to implement it.

      Delete
    3. I used to work as a lawyer (before I became disabled) - wills and probate admittedly. But I remember from my uni days well the theory around constructive dismissal - some of you will be familiar with these terms in employment law - constructive/unfair/wrongful dismissal. Basically, wrongful dismissal is when your employer is RIGHT to have fired you but he goes through the WRONG procedure when he does so (not enough notice/pay etc), unfair dismissal is where he is WRONG to fire you in principle (no matter whether or not he follows the right procedure in doing so) and constructive dismissal is where YOU RESIGN - you are NOT fired, but you are entitled to TREAT YOURSELF as having been fired because the employer has made your job so unbearable and so difficult to do. I don't mean to witter on about employment law but it strikes me that this similar principle - frustration of your efforts to comply with the "jobseeker contract" could in some way be relevant to the whole "fairness" of the "jobseeker contract" and that IS of course open to challenge. Some bright spark of a welfare rights lawyer will be on this right now as we speak, I'm sure.

      Delete
  2. Laws are made & repealed by the Government. Cameron & his cronies have made it very clear that they have no respect for Human Rights in this country ( Hague gave a pompous self-congratulatory sermon on how much he & Cameron are doing to support these rights for people in other countries). Anyone who still believes 'our' Government wouldn't force people to do anything that would harm them needs to wake up to the fact that it's already happening. 'Workfare' is forced labour & contravenes the Human Rights Act 1998, the European Convention & Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Who's stopping them?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Seems familiar. Oh yes,
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Re-education_through_labor

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have heard far too many horrid stories of trans people being mistreated by the mental health 'profession'. The majority of them have zero training in relation to gender dysphoria but many still think they get to pass judgement on us. There are many with deep seated prejudices, sometimes influenced by religious beliefs, sometimes not. I've heard of trans people in inpatient care (usually for issues not directly related to being trans) being misgendered and refused access to things like binders. Outside of inpatient settings, patients can usually just choose to not see doctors that are prejudiced against them and that would do them harm. Most trans people I know who have other mental health problems aren't trying to access treatment due to how awful the experience often is. We're not helping save tax payers money by seeing people who would make us WORSE! If treatment becomes mandated then I forsee mass abuse of trans people, and members of other minorities by psychiatrists. This would be awful for a lot of people.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's probably illegal to force someone to work for no money against their will, too, but it's not stopping them.

    It's things like this that are behind the tory's hatred judicial review. They don't want pesky things like the law gettting in the way, so, for example, charities representing the disabled will be unable to challenge the law under the new rules.

    ReplyDelete
  6. cunts the lot of them...lets vote the tory scum out ...

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that enforced treatment against people's free will was practised by the Nazis in the second world war.

    ReplyDelete
  8. They'll argue that nothing is compulsory, since the claimant can simply walk away. Alright, they may then be without benefit, but it's up to them to make another application.
    It definitely goes against human rights conventions/guidelines, but that doesn't seem to count for much ; if a country is shown to be behaving this way it is supposed to be shamed into behaving correctly.
    However, this government are without shame, plus they've been trying to discredit human rights for years.The gov. would simply dismiss any criticism from the UN, or from the relevant European entity, and probably gain some popularity in doing so.It's all so f****d up.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Not sure about this but I got the impression that it would be aimed at those who had been ATOS assessed & put into the Work Related Activity Group rather than those signed off to the Support Group (disabled). Still an appalling situation

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It isn't just people in Support Group who are disabled, It's entirely possible to be a JSA claimant and be very significantly disabled (a point made by the Work and Pensions Committee when criticising DWP), while anyone claiming ESA and in WRAG long term is almost inevitably going to meet the legal definition of disability. I would be in the WRAG if I was actually claiming at the minute (I've both been in WRAG and claimed JSA at the same level of disability), yet my pain management consultant says he sees no hope of me returning to the workforce, even in the long term.

      WRT the proposals, it looks like they're primarily focused on JSA, there were a couple of remarks post speech that suggested they seriously hadn't thought through the implications re single mothers and people on ESA and were scrambling to cover themselves, but that still covers a multitude of disabled people claiming JSA. And we know from other news that IDS wants to make it even more difficult to claim ESA, while even without changes he hasn't been shy about treating anyone in WRAG as being immediately capable of work and expanding JSA sanctions and conditionality and Work Programme to cover them.

      Delete
  10. What about those of us with lifelong MH problems that are helped by counselling but never completely go away? I'm never going to be "better". No work programme or intensive therapy will make me more employable. I already have help from my doc and my counsellor but it's mostly there to stop me getting worse. Still, this doesn't stop them reassessing blind people every five minutes who have to say - yep, I'm still blind. Or one legged people who haven't grown a new leg between WCAs. It's the same with these lifelong MH issues, they fluctuate and baseline wellness can slowly come up but tiny, tiny improvements are very hard won.

    ReplyDelete
  11. With all the lack of care there is due to large case loads,they wish to mass dump us to companies whose real interest is profit. Trying to get proper care is hard and leaves you hanging for calls often to experience appt changes and if you dare like me alter an appt given due their prior cancellation due to having ca bug,well the chase starts again.Perhaps I am beyond help and the MH Depts are making me worse. my PTSD and Major Depression have been here for 20 years it is not going to go away,I've given up hoping one day I will awake from it :-(

    ReplyDelete
  12. Where are they going to get all these people to carry out intensive programmes? It's almost impossible to get assistance when you are mentally ill - it took me years. Are they suddenly going to have well trained mental health professionals to hand or are they going to give people six sessions of bullshit cbt and pronounce them cured?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correct! When and if you are fortunate enough to get access to a MH professional they are limited to the amount of sessions they are allowed to give you

      Delete
  13. Not to mention those with lifelong mental disabilities such as Autism. They've been expertly sidelining the issue of people on the Spectrum for several years now and even the charities are not making any progress. Autistic people will never get better, it's not going to go away. And how do you explain their business models and money-saving savvy to an Autistic person? Sick.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I checked and Rethink confirmed, this report was ITV only, the speech text did not mention mental health, now checking the delivered version video.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In that case, maybe he said it in an interview with ITV rather than the speech?

      OK, it's possible ITV made it up. But it does sound like the kind of thing Osborne would say.

      Delete
    2. Dropped from speech http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2013/09/30/george-osborne-s-conference-speech-in-full http://youtu.be/3a9S22XVjkQ?t=27m19s what this likely means is it was in early drafts and that's what was in press release to itv but once tories realised it was prob illegal (and immoral, tho tories so) they edited it out, weird stuff went on with his and ids speech, Osborne stole the big welfare announcement from IDS who was late to his speech and had only small things to say, he must have been fuming.

      Delete
  15. Is it just me , or does everyone without mh problems fail to grasp the fact that increasing anxiety,stress and pressure on people by forcing them into situations they can't deal with ultimately leads to more severe mental health issues ? same goes for those who have other disabilities which genuinely mean they can't realistically hold down a job, mainly because most employers either overlook you because of you disability or are woefully inadequet when it comes to making reasonable adjustments . It may help, tory party , to sort out the disgraceful way disabled and ill people are treated generally in society before you go trying to force them into jobs they can't do or wont be assisted to do. Just a thought. and as we are low on health care staff,counsellers, phsychiatrisits, supportworkers and carers are being denied much needed support to continue their caring role, who the hell is going to be doing all this 'intensive treament' and where is the money going to come from ? er , i was under the impression we were in a recession (thanks bankers) but they keep finding spare billions when it suits them for other countries and projects that make the rich richer...amazing..but no money for health care,schools,or the needy ... hhmmmmm.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thank god for the European Court of Human Rights!

    ReplyDelete
  17. The ATOS medical assessors, office walls decorated with picturesque parchments and diplomas from various minor south-west African institutions of questionable provenance, are all on a performance related bonus scheme. Seeing as many are on short-term contracts their motivation to up the body count of claimants taken out of ESA is obviously a greater motivation than medical veracity. If ATOS were hired as a cost-cutting measure I wonder how much money they ever saved for the tax-payer when the expense of appeals and legal costs are taken into account..

    ReplyDelete
  18. I thought it was illegal to force people into treatment. At least, when they were first mooting this they dismissed it because it was illegal.

    ReplyDelete
  19. You cats should take a look at Private Eye No.1350 04Oct-17Oct2013 P30 for two articles on questionable practises of Atos. I'm not sure of how much practical use to claimants/appeal-ants it will be, but amongst other things it does imply that the automatic right of appeal could be in danger.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Good to know Labour will hammer down on the unemployed and sick and the disabled Ms Reeves stated labour will hammer down, which leader will the welfare scroungers vote for, Labour feared we all go to the BNP under Gordon Brown now labour see us all voting UKIP

    ReplyDelete