Invisible Illness Awareness Week 2016: Our Voices Need to Be Heard
Never heard of Invisible Illness Awareness Week? You're not alone. Jody Smith sheds a little light to make it more visible
Discuss the article on the Forums.

(UK) DWP considering treatment of long-term chronic conditions.

Discussion in 'Action Alerts and Advocacy' started by RogerBlack, Jul 27, 2017.

  1. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    884
    Likes:
    2,867
    https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forums/viewthread/11593/
    Of treatment of claimants of long-term conditions with ESA. (supposed to be more sensible treatment with fewer reassessments.
    It would obviously be valueable to have ME/CFS for those affected long-term in this group, with the stats of recovery being so bad.

    I do not know who the stakeholders are, or what group is developing this list inside the DWP, clearly the deadline must be soon. (I also don't know if there have been efforts made already by the community)


    Library of commons briefing on this. http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7820/CBP-7820.pdf
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
    Valentijn, Esther12, MeSci and 5 others like this.
  2. snowathlete

    snowathlete

    Messages:
    3,312
    Likes:
    14,610
    UK
    Luther Blissett and MEMum like this.
  3. MEMum

    MEMum Senior Member

    Messages:
    401
    Likes:
    2,058
    Per the above Library of Commons briefing

    "The change would only apply to claimants placed in the ESA Support Group and the equivalent group in Universal Credit.2

    Exemption from reassessment would not be based on medical condition. The Government stated: Rather than a list of specific medical conditions, the criteria will be based on identifying claimants with the most severe health conditions or disabilities where it would be unreasonable to expect the individual to undertake any form or amount of work or work-related activity."

    The identification of claimants with the "most severe health conditions or disabilities...", would be done by assessors.
     
  4. Wonko

    Wonko Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,439
    Likes:
    4,742
    The other side.
    ...and surely everyone in the support group already meets the requirement of being those "with the most severe health conditions or disabilities where it would be unreasonable to expect the individual to undertake any form or amount of work or work-related activity." - as this is the purpose of the support group (and ministers have repeatedly lied and claimed that people in the support group are not subject to constant reassessments).

    But yes...it will be done by assessors, and assessors are trained to..........so I look forward to congratulating the 4 people who meet the criteria between 2018 and 2030
     
    Valentijn, MEMum, MeSci and 2 others like this.
  5. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    884
    Likes:
    2,867
    However, there would typically be guidance to assessors, which gives a list "such as Altzheimers, Huntingtons, ...". CFS being on this list would be valulable.
     
  6. RogerBlack

    RogerBlack Senior Member

    Messages:
    884
    Likes:
    2,867
    This is not the legal test.

    The legal test for entry into the support group is meeting any of the specific support group descriptors, or if 'work related activity' would put you at risk.

    These one paragraph caricatures of the law have been all too commonly used, and few read through to the actual regulations.

    It is this one paragraph caricature "Those in the work related activity group are the less severe, and those expected to recover within the short term" has been used to remove extra payment for this group. Even incoming secretaries of state for work and pensions do not understand that long-term conditions and other factors exist in this group.

    On to the topic of the original post.

    I note that the "rather than a list of specific medical conditions" was a statement made in Oct 2016, and the more recent February statement copied above implies a different approach.
     
    Last edited: Jul 27, 2017
    Luther Blissett likes this.

See more popular forum discussions.

Share This Page