Petition to stop private contracting of PIP assessments

Mike1

There is a petition to stop private contracting out of health-related assessments for PIP and ESA: The brother of a disabled man who was denied PIP when he was dying has launched a petition calling on the government to scrap the outsourcing of all face-to-face assessments to private contractors. If you would like to sign the petition go to: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/274312

[Deleted User]

Thanks Mike. Over 5,000 signatures already
Brynmor

stickywicket

I've been dithering about this ever since I read it. Obviously, all assessors should have medical qualifications but, given that we are already hundreds of thousands of nurses short, not to mention doctors, midwives and physios, how can we justify taking more away from hospitals?

PIP was always flawed because it was started without enough money. I don't know what the answer is but I dion't think this is it. It takes years to train nurses etc. Taking them out of the NHS would only create an even bigger problem and more deaths.

Mike1

This is not about taking medical professionals out of the NHS it is about stopping the underhanded way in which the companies "assess" claimants; the blatant lies which have been told about our conditions by the so-called "qualified assessors", the majority of which seem to have no specific knowledge of the conditions that they are supposedly assessing. Not to mention the fact that bonuses are paid by the Government for the number of claimants denied and the number of claimants who are frightened into ending their claims as their appeals are heard in Court. From the number of reports compiled by various organisations analysing the PIP system, many of which I have referred to on this forum, the consensus is that the current system is seriously flawed and needs to be re-thought. Apart from the distress caused to claimants I have a hard job understanding how employing private contractors, who make significant profits, is cheaper than bringing the PIP assessment system back "in-house". To my mind the assessments should be done by someone employed within each individual's surgery as they have access to one's records and, in the case of any ambiguity, can discuss the matter with the GPs.

stickywicket

Mike, I agree with virtually all you say but I still wonder how without depleting even further much needed medical professionals elsewhere.

Mike1

If the money spent on employing contractors to undertake the assessments is diverted to GP Surgeries then there is no depletion of the NHS. Initial assessments could be undertaken by Surgery Nurses or Locums backed by individual's GPs where necessary.

daffy2

Mike1 wrote:

If the money spent on employing contractors to undertake the assessments is diverted to GP Surgeries then there is no depletion of the NHS. Initial assessments could be undertaken by Surgery Nurses or Locums backed by individual's GPs where necessary.

I rather doubt that extra funding would enable my surgery to take on that extra work - it is chronically understaffed(always GPs and often nurses) and has been so for years. It isn't a question of money, the town isn't seen as desirable career wise I'm told - the other surgery has had similar problems. Given the large shortfall in the numbers of GPs from which to recruit in the first place, which means applicants can pick and choose, the town is always going to be disadvantaged.
As an aside, having 'knowledgeable' people doing the assessments doesn't necessarily ensure better outcomes. I know of someone who took a post with one of the 'demon firms' who has excellent credentials with regard to knowledge of inflammatory conditions and their effects, but zero interest in, or tolerance of, the effects on the individual. I sometimes wonder what the appeal rate is for those decisions...

stickywicket

I don't deny that the whle thing is a mess but I see no point in replacing one mess with another. There aren't enough docs / nurses. When I first got Disabled Housewives' Allowance there were two docs at our health centre. By the time I moved to Scotland there were 5-6 docs, two nurses and several phlebotomists. It's the same at my current practice. Lots more but not enough to do even what they're doing now.

I could be wrong here but I seem to remember that one reason for taking it all out of the hands of the patients' GPs was because the GPs came under a lot of pressure from said patients to give them what thety wanted. And, when thety didn't give them what they wanted, some patients rocked up again abnd again and again to grind them down.

The PIP system is utterly broken. Let's not, in our haste, replace it with something worse.