Poll: The official I voted/election results thread

Who did you vote for?

  • Alliance Party of Northern Ireland

    Votes: 4 0.3%
  • Conservative

    Votes: 518 39.5%
  • Democratic Unionist Party

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Green Party

    Votes: 65 5.0%
  • Labour

    Votes: 241 18.4%
  • Liberal Democrats

    Votes: 99 7.5%
  • Didn't vote / spoiled ballot

    Votes: 136 10.4%
  • Other party

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Plaid Cymru

    Votes: 6 0.5%
  • Respect Party

    Votes: 1 0.1%
  • SNP

    Votes: 67 5.1%
  • Social Democratic and Labour Party

    Votes: 2 0.2%
  • Sinn Fein

    Votes: 4 0.3%
  • UKIP

    Votes: 158 12.0%

  • Total voters
    1,313
Joined
27 Jul 2005
Posts
13,083
Location
The Orion Spur
Incidentally, how should claims be assessed in your eyes?

By your Doctor, and then confirmed by an adjudication officer like it used to be, although I believe more stringent guidelines would have to be followed. In fact the money that goes to ATOS would be better invested into GP surgeries with extra staff to enable them to assess people for work capability and also provide a better care in general.

We never used to have to pay a large outside corporation millions to assess disability claims.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
23 Oct 2002
Posts
13,597
By your Doctor, and then confirmed by an adjudication officer like it used to be, although I believe more stringent guidelines would have to be followed. In fact the money that goes to ATOS would be better invested into GP surgeries with extra staff to enable them to assess people for work capability and also provide a better care in general.

We never used to have to pay a large outside corporation millions to assess disability claims.

That is part of the privatisation of everything. I expect more prisons and lots more Govt. offices. They sneaked news of a privatisation(GPSS) just before the election in an Energy bill. Now the UK relies on a foreign company(Spanish) to pipe fuel to military bases and airfields. When they have sold everything and still get a poor but expensive service such as the train fiasco what will they do then?
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,385
Location
Plymouth
By your Doctor, and then confirmed by an adjudication officer like it used to be, although I believe more stringent guidelines would have to be followed. In fact the money that goes to ATOS would be better invested into GP surgeries with extra staff to enable them to assess people for work capability and also provide a better care in general.

We never used to have to pay a large outside corporation millions to assess disability claims.

The problem is 'your doctor' is not independent. Their income depends on keeping their patients happy (GPs being private companies after all).

You need someone who is independent to do the assessments, not someone whose income depends on giving either party the answer they are hoping for.
 
Caporegime
Joined
22 Nov 2005
Posts
45,527
not someone whose income depends on giving either party the answer they are hoping for.
we all know what answer the government was hoping for with each atos assessment.
It's more one sided than your average gp.

a lot of people don't even see the same gp everytime they book an appointment these days? I wouldn't say there's any loyalty other than to give an honest report
 
Associate
Joined
11 Dec 2002
Posts
849
Location
Newcastle
I agree that a GP really isn't the best person to make the assessment. They do not want a breakdown in relationship with a patient, not because somehow their income depends on it as Dolph would suggest, as that is simply not true. It does however make it very difficult to manage them if there is a conflict and the GP role is much more of a patients advocate. A GP is also not trained in occupational medicine and therefore doesn't have the training to actually assess their ability to do various work. Lastly and frankly most importantly a GP just doesn't have time to do this work. It's hard enough to see and deal with the work they do at present let alone dump another load of work on them.
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,785
Location
Wales
By your Doctor, and then confirmed by an adjudication officer like it used to be, although I believe more stringent guidelines would have to be followed. In fact the money that goes to ATOS would be better invested into GP surgeries with extra staff to enable them to assess people for work capability and also provide a better care in general.

We never used to have to pay a large outside corporation millions to assess disability claims.

doctors dont want to say no to thier patients though.

of all the people getting DLA or whatever its called now they don't have a real medical condition but they keep getting letters from the gp for "anxiety" etc.


so anxious they cant work, but perfectly fine going out drinking, going to house parties going out normally in the day time etc.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Posts
16,030
Location
UK
Long term disability could be easily checked by talking to the patient's hospital consultant, surely. They would know the condition intimately. I'm assuming everyone with a substantial physical problem is referred to a consultant.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
24,129
Location
In the middle
Long term disability could be easily checked by talking to the patient's hospital consultant, surely. They would know the condition intimately. I'm assuming everyone with a substantial physical problem is referred to a consultant.

You would think so. The idea is to cut DLA though, by X amount, regardless if that is actually possible or not without effecting genuinely sick/disabled people.
 
Soldato
Joined
16 Jun 2005
Posts
24,129
Location
In the middle
Commissario
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
33,118
Location
Panting like a fiend
Long term disability could be easily checked by talking to the patient's hospital consultant, surely. They would know the condition intimately. I'm assuming everyone with a substantial physical problem is referred to a consultant.

You would think so (at least for most conditions).

But given the DLA have managed to totally ignore multiple, very explicit and plainly worded letters from senior consultants in the past, I wouldn't like to bet on it being that simple.

My mother had her DLA removed (and not reinstated for over a year), because they couldn't read their own doctors notes and completely ignored several increasingly plainly worded letters from her consultant. IIRC her consultant couldn't believe that it had been removed given how obvious her problem was to even lay people, and anyone with reasonable medical training should have understood the medical terms (and was by all accounts very annoyed that they were ignoring the medical evidence). I've heard of a lot of similar cases since then.

It's also worth noting that there are some long term conditions that might make you unfit for work where there simply isn't a specific consultant in most areas, and if it's something they can't actively assist you with you may not see them very often, if ever.
There are some conditions like CFS/M.E. where it's known there is something wrong*, but the only real diagnosis at the moment is via elimination, and very little in the way of treatments that have actually been shown to work (and some that work in some cases but make it worse in others).


*IIRC in both groups of illness there are markers that appear to show up in very specific tests when done under research conditions (no quick and easy test, as one involves looking for specific proteins in spinal fluid and has so far only been used in initial research).
 
Man of Honour
Joined
17 Oct 2002
Posts
50,385
Location
Plymouth
Long term disability could be easily checked by talking to the patient's hospital consultant, surely. They would know the condition intimately. I'm assuming everyone with a substantial physical problem is referred to a consultant.

Don't confuse condition with ability to work, because ability to work depends as much on the individual as the condition. Likewise don't confuse a hospital consultant with an expert in occupational medicine.

Onr of the biggest problems with our welfare system's approach to disability is that it confuses the two, and fails to provide enough in work support to the disabled (or makes the system so complex and demeaning it isn't worth the hassle and grief of trying to claim) for those who work through their disabilities or make adaptations off their own back, and gives far more to people who don't work, many of whom could actually do so with the right support and a good employer, which has the effect of trapping people on benefits at a time when the benefits of work (socialisation, increased feeling of worth etc) would be significantly beneficial.

For the record, I am certainly not defending the current atos setup, but nor would I support a return to the even more trapping incapacity benefit.
 
Soldato
Joined
31 May 2009
Posts
21,257
A secure locker in a bar to store your half drunk £4k bottle of cognac for another day.

LOL

Daily Mail said:
With Chuka gone, the Labour leadership contest now has all the appeal of Hamlet without the Prince, underlining the dullness of Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper and co. If anything, the aura surrounding him is even greater now than before.

Whoever succeeds Ed Miliband will be the Labour leader, but there will still be only one star: Chuka.

The Daily Mail are utterly hilarious!
 
Back
Top Bottom