Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Fit to work?

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Aug 27, 2015 5:44 pm

atticus wrote:The latter conclusion may be the right one; but it cannot be said to be based on any evidence so far shown in this thread.

True, but are you aware of the efforts it has taken to persuade them to release the statistics?
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Thu Aug 27, 2015 7:03 pm

It would have been better to have asked for better statistics: mortality rates rather than just a headcount.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Hairyloon » Thu Aug 27, 2015 7:41 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:It would have been better to have asked for better statistics: mortality rates rather than just a headcount.

I wouldn't be surprised if they were asked for better statistics. Government departments do not always give out the information they were asked for... especially if it shows the kind of things that we might suspect that they are going to show.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Thu Aug 27, 2015 8:22 pm

The information requested is set out in the Information Commissioner's Decision Notice. There is no need to be surprised.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6293
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Fit to work?

Postby dls » Fri Aug 28, 2015 5:46 pm

There may very well be a proper question needing clarification about any causal connection, but it seems to cry out as desparate that so many people who were assessed as fit to work should die within a very short time. It seems to me that in the absence of some stupendous clarification, the assessment system must be assumed to be wildly inaccurate. Unless the assessments are in the many millions, the number is so high that you can only distrust the assessments.

Many many years ago, when my lad was a child, he had a rabbit. One Sunday, a friend, a vet, was over for lunch. He approved the rabbit.
The next morning, the rabbit was dead. My four year old identified the explanation 'He can't have done rabbits yet.'

That was funny. This isn't.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12195
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Fit to work?

Postby miner » Fri Aug 28, 2015 6:12 pm

The sorts of people doing these assessments are akin in my mind to accountants who sit on their own investigative bodies, solicitors who act as Court of Protection Panel Deputies, etc.

They are in my experience creatures who are the scum of their trade/profession, who are so incompetent that they cannot find normal work to do and end up in these dead-end roles, still paid quite well, enjoying a wonderful lack of accountability for what they do and the protection of the umbrella organization for which they "work".
miner
 
Posts: 2341
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2012 12:22 am

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Russell » Fri Aug 28, 2015 7:15 pm

If you can't talk about the problem, how are you ever going to even start talking about the solution?
Russell
 
Posts: 1574
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2014 7:47 pm

Re: Fit to work?

Postby dls » Sat Aug 29, 2015 7:26 am

Excellent find.

It shows how (mea culpa) we jump from words which say half something to a conclusion which is not justified.

All that is left to complain of (perhaps) is the weak-kneed response of the DWP.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12195
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Fit to work?

Postby Hairyloon » Sat Aug 29, 2015 8:32 am

dls wrote:It shows how (mea culpa) we jump from words which say half something to a conclusion which is justified...


Does it? I am not sure that I follow.
While it is clearly true that someone who survives long enough to begin an appeal is not as ill as one who survives less than two weeks, that does not alter the fact that they were clearly pretty ill, nor that they spent their last days battling with the DWP.
Take me to your lizard...
User avatar
Hairyloon
 
Posts: 10016
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 3:12 pm
Location: From there to here and here to there... Funny things are everywhere.

Re: Fit to work?

Postby dls » Sat Aug 29, 2015 9:00 am

A case of the puzzled 'not'?

As presented (by some) the case was that a substantial number had died within two weeks of being assessed fit to work.

That is not what the figures were.

I was speaking of what this might show about the reliability of the assessments. I acknowledge that there are many other issues - I was just not discussing them.

I have to say still that I do not understand the explanation actually given. It must mean something, butas soon as you stretch te date between assessment and death, my surprise disappears in proportion.
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12195
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

PreviousNext

Return to Benefits

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest