And what makes a doctor capable of assessing that fact? What training do
they have to assess your capabilities with regard to work?
If you go to your GP they ask questions and the examination is
superficial, does this hurt, does that hurt, how do you feel .... All too
often doctors consider your capabilities in terms of your normal job.
You are trying to make it sound like anyone can get signed off by simply
asking, that might work for a couple of weeks. Doctors have nothing to do
with how the DWP and Atos operates, they went to real medical schools to get
real qualifications and in the real world a doctor follows up by sending
patients to hospital for X rays, blood tests etc. The results of those tests
will confirm if a patient is genuine or not.
Just because your joints are too f***** to work on building site
does not make you incapable of work. Your bad back means you can't work
in a warehouse, well there are millions of sedentary jobs.
Thats fine, and is often the case with ESA claimants who are no longer
capable of heavy lifting and running around, therefore under the rules they
qualify fo ESA. But your Atos medical will ignore the fact they have bad
joints, and cant get around like they used to. That is not how a system that
was designed to assess people operates if it is genuine, that is a system
designed to deliberately fail people no matter what happens. The JC will
also ignore that fact and order them to apply for non sedentary jobs, if not
they will stop JSA.
I have been offered med certs 3 times by three doctors over the last eight
years or so, and not one of those occasions would I say I was unfit for
work. I am no die hard come hell or high water I will work type, on each
occasion I worked on with a little discomfort, painkillers & anti
inflamatory drugs.
If the DWP has been breaking the law it has been doing so for 20+ years.
ESA has only been in place since 2008
Bearing in mind there are many people/groups able and willing to
challenge the DWP I'm sure it has been tried and tested in a court of law
and therefore it is lawful, your opinion has no bearing on the matter; nor
mine.
Its a relatively new system, impossible to get to court that quick.
I'm sure the gov wants to put people off claiming, it's human nature for
many people to take the easiest route, if you allow some people to sit at
home and watch daytime TV collecting easy money they will. The gov has a
duty to protect the taxpayer from such people so checks have to be put in
place.
You know as well as I do that is a joke, any scheme the government
introduces will cost more in admin than it can possibly save, if they
seriously cared about protecting taxpayer money, they would reduce
bureaucracy. I agree some checks have to be made, but breaking the rules to
make an unworkable system work is going to far.
The benefits system allows people to live in the same comfort or greater
comfort than many working people, how can that be right?
How can it be right that basic wages no longer cover the cost of living, the
whole system is fcked, blaming the unemployed and sick for that is not going
to solve the problem. Nobody seems to want to point the finger at where the
blame really lies for this, the fact is we have a bunch of greedy bastards
running the country, but the media won't tell you that because its true.
Why work if you can have the same 50" widescreen TV, games console etc and
have more time to enjoy them by not working?
Games consols, TV! what age group are you talking about here? Kids living at
home by the sound of it. Don't believe the hype.