Working in Parliament A summary of my work as a Wellcome Postgraduate Fellow at the Parliamentary...
-
Upload
fay-ramsey -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of Working in Parliament A summary of my work as a Wellcome Postgraduate Fellow at the Parliamentary...
Working in Parliament
A summary of my work as a Wellcome Postgraduate Fellow at the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology
Gareth Millward – Sept. 2012
POST debrief
Improving health worldwide www.lshtm.ac.uk
What is POST?
• Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology• Part of the Houses of Parliament, with links to both the Commons
and the Lords• Independent of Government• Provides advice and briefings to parliamentarians on policy issues
involving science.
My Brief
• To research and write a POSTnote – a four-page briefing for parliamentarians outlining the key debates in a policy area involving science.
• My note was about the medical tests used to determine eligibility for
out-of-work disability benefit – the Work Capability Assessment.
My Findings
• The WCA is a three-stage process for claiming ESA– A questionnaire, filled in by the claimant and including their GP’s evidence– A functional test, measuring the claimant’s ability to walk, carry a box, verbally
communicate, etc. This is performed by private company Atos Healthcare– A DWP decision maker uses all this evidence to decide on eligibility
• Many people previously found eligible for Incapacity Benefit are now being declared “fit for work” – 40% appeal this decision, and 40% of those succeed in having this decision reversed.
• Therefore this is a costly exercise for govt and claimants• Criticisms also include: the decision maker simply takes the Atos recommendation
and ignores the questionnaire; the test is a one-off event and therefore creates a “snapshot” of a person’s condition; the new criteria are arbitrary, designed solely to solve cost not direct benefit to the “most in need”
• Independent reviews have made some of these criticisms, and evidence suggests the government has in good faith responded and made positive changes
• < http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-papers/POST-PN-413 >
Implications
For policy makers• More account needs to be taken of
subjective evidence to avoid the “common sense” failures of “obviously” disabled people being denied benefit
• In future, perhaps more rigorous testing of new techniques would be wise
• More openness is needed with the contract with Atos – secrecy fuels conspiracy theories
• The difference between “disability” and “capacity” is crucial, but many people do not seem to understand it – including many in parliament
For historians of medicine• This is part of a long-standing problem.
We have never satisfactorily defined “capacity” and/or “disability” in the welfare state
• Neo-liberal governments believe measurement, targets and ideal types will yield efficient public services, but there appears to be a failure with disability
• The arguments of disabled people themselves – that disease != disability – have been appropriated to create a system that denies disability’s place in out-of-work benefits
• The “Fabian” tradition of campaigning may have backfired in this case
What has happened since?
Two months is a long time in politics... As an historian I disapprove.• The contract with Atos Healthcare has been heavily criticised by the
Audit Commission• Chris Grayling and Maria Miller, the Under Secs, have moved on.• The BMA has formally voted to oppose the WCA and wants it
scrapped (although there may be other issues at play here!)• Reports in the press continue about people dying after being found
fit for work (see www.iainduncansmith.com)• New mental health descriptors are being trialled after major
criticism of the old ones• The Paralympics has raised questions about reforms to DLA, an
extra-costs disability benefit which will have a WCA-style assessment• Malcolm Harrington, the well-respected independent reviewer, has
been replaced for the Year 4 and Year 5 reviews.