“Dear Disability Law Service
The following is fairly self-explanatory. My contention is that by not offering a moratorium on disability/sickness benefit re-assessment during lockdown the government is denying fundamental human rights to claimants. DPAC and I would like to know whether or not you feel that there is a case. Thank you.”…
“The whole advocacy process is compromised by lockdown, it takes time to prepare a case, if you suffer from a stress related condition and/or have energy-management disability issues etc. your ability to make use of advocacy resources is far more limited under Covid restrictions.” Sent this yesterday.
As it turns out I know Penny from DPAC Southampton (she was at Declan Murray’s funeral), we have a mutual friend in Tony Twine (friend of D.Cromwell’s as it happens), Penny has suggested that I write an article for The Morning Star (I will include the story -I related-, concerning my friend who had to have his dose of anti-psychotic drugs increased and was prescribed anti-depressants following the initial loss of his PIP entitlement), I was going to blog it anyway, now I hope to be able to write for DPAC too. Every cloud.
Penny has offered to be with me when I make my PIP re-application.
The DWP failed to inform me of the change, I only found out when I viewed council correspondence concerning Council Tax, this stated that I was no longer in receipt of PIP, the DWP, whilst admitting their mistake (I should have been told in November), do not agree that they should reinstate my claim whilst I make my appeal. My advocate and I are contesting this, he hasn’t had another client who the DWP has done this to! I am, therefore, having to re-apply for PIP.
Good luck, G! Shocking the way the most vulnerable, at the bottom of the wealth-n-opportunity heap, are always the first to be trashed by the PTshB in money-saving mode…
A long time ago now I worked in welfare rights and disputes about capacity for work (as it was termed then) were distressingly common, but very often (in fact nearly always) overturned by Tribunals. The problem, of course, is enduring the loss of income and the stress etc, for however long it takes to get your ‘day in court’.
Use of Zoom-type technology further removes decision-makers from the human consequences. Not of quite the same dimension as operators of killer drones, but the same psychological distancing is coming into play.
Hi @Kieran_Telo , I have this horrible feeling that those in charge of our illfare system know full well about Sheldon Cohen’s work on killing with stress!
@GKH , best of luck, as my father-in-law used to quip: nihil illegitimi carborundum!
I do wonder sometimes how researchers would cope without a steady supply of students as their volunteers. One implication though is that the factors that lead to certain groups being overrepresented in the student population are replicated in the studies themselves.
Henrich et al (2010) refers. They used the acronym “Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic (WEIRD)” to highlight this tendency.
The full article is several dozen pages long, and may be paywalled (a SAGE journal I think) but this is a decent summary:
My contention is that when a patient/claimant is suffering from stress the physical presence of another person is a vital component of putting the patient/claimant at ease, I will point out that what our two stories (and many, many others I have no doubt), demonstrate is that those with vulnerabilities to stress do indeed suffer unduly when their security of income is compromised and that it is surely totally counter-productive (using the term very advisedly), to inflict torture on people who don’t fit the myriad square holes available for circular pegs. For instance I have the documentation concerning my last (and successful), appeal. I would normally go through these with my advocate (face-to-face), but the telephone is not suitable for this kind of detailed (two person), analysis when the process of a prolonged and detailed telephone consultation elevates the patient/claimant’s stress levels and the demands on both the time and stamina of advocates are so high.
The other aspect of lockdown is, of-course, the isolation, coping with stress when isolated (and suffering from a certain amount of claustrophobia), can be next to impossible leading to both panic and anxiety attacks (and much worse in a good number of cases), one becomes “risk-averse” making the prospect of the process of telephone assessment (interrogation), very disturbing, the “risk” is real, however, as reaction to the process can be severe.
“I will include the story -I related-, concerning my friend who had to have his dose of anti-psychotic drugs increased and was prescribed anti-depressants following the initial loss of his PIP entitlement”
My friend (who has given me permission to use his story as long as he remains anon.), had his olanzapine (anti-psychotic), dose raised from 15-20mg/day and was prescribed 100mg sertraline/day (an anti-depressant medication he had not previously been prescribed), following episodes he suffered from after he had been denied his PIP entitlement, in other words he became paranoid and convinced (“fantasised”), that people were after him!
No shit. My best wishes to him and an anecdote in return which could be filed under There But For The Grace…
One of the better GPs in our group practise upped my sertraline to 100mg per Diem after my last ill-advised attempt to wean myself off the damn stuff in Feb 2020. This is a cyclical event for me and many others of us subject to the chemical cosh.
With unusual empathy (based on her experience of parenting an autistic child, it emerged) she suggested postponing any further attempts until I retire. Another way of putting this is that the effort of ‘passing for normal’ in the world of work (but its other people, to be blunt) is essentially the source of the anxiety that powers the ‘illness’.
The Ordeal By PIP Assessment takes this to a whole other level, which I count myself lucky to have avoided. (Maybe I should touch wood and add ’ so far’.)
While I wouldn’t necessarily recommend it, as it’s very poorly written, and historically ignorant, but Frances Ryan’s book of a couple of years ago is jammed with awful examples.
The key weakness, besides that she really cannot write, is little recognition that the pauper/deserving poor binary has been a feature of the grudging ‘support’ afforded to those that suffer for centuries.
I’m trying to avoid taking the stronger opioid they’ve prescribed…sickens me …the one time I tried to commit suicide was using para-codeine (the codeine component of which they now deliver regularly to my door in stronger form), I could be (far more), independent (and employed), if marijuana was both legal and prescribed…it ticks all the boxes, opioids cannot even be considered in the same breathe as marijuana in terms of long-term use for chronic pain…there simply is no comparison… If you do get challenged over PIP get yourself a good advocate asap (although it’s not a user-friendly process now -re: case!-), …
