When it comes to mental health, trying
to get onto ESA is uniquely difficult. Of course
it’s difficult, period. But I think, and I’ve seen, that mental health is
peculiar in this.
The CAB needs me to get a letter
from my GP to underline how my conditions affect me. Specifically this has to
pertain to what the ESA descriptors require
to qualify for the points awarded. It’s like a terrifying game show. Turns out,
however, that my GP received a letter from the CAB asking for this already and
she has responded – but, I fear, not in the way the CAB and I need. I tried to
explain that the process requires she verify my explanation in response to
these descriptors. Here’s an example:
ESA
Brucey Forsythe: “Now for 6 points, can you tell me whether or not you can cope
with small unexpected changes to your daily routine.”
This is the specific requirement
for the descriptor ‘coping with changes’; in other words this is what the ESA
system needs to know about in order to qualify.
Contestant Ghost Whistler: “no –
change to an appointment time would be upsetting and uncomfortable (I also said
to the CAB adviser that had she changed this appointment I would have
struggled).
What the CAB needs is for my GP
to rubber stamp this with a letter or document I can take to the tribunal. Unfortunately
for me my GP doesn’t quite understand this. Again there is the lack of appreciation
for what is actually required of the claimant according to the system. According
to her she can’t actively verify this. Unlike, say, a broken arm (something tangible
and visible), she can’t know that’s true. She can’t diagnose this.
Herein lies the problem; it seems
that for mental health issues people in her position require a diagnosis. She’s
happy to facilitate that (though god knows when or even if that will happen
locally – never mind in time for a tribunal), but she can’t directly verify my
description as above. That’s not to say she doesn’t agree, though of course we
all know that’s how it will be seen. So she has sent off some evidence to the
CAB sort of answering the questions. Unfortunately she couldn’t get me a copy
of her answers so I have to wait for the CAB to receive her report (posted Friday)
and get in touch to see whether it meets with their approval – i.e. whether
they think it’s going to help. It might, but then again I fear it will not do
so directly and that is the problem.
The great irony is that while GP’s
speak in the language of diagnosis, the ESA
assessment system does not. In her mind a diagnosis of ADD/Aspergers (or
whatever) is answer enough, but to the DWP a diagnosis is irrelevant. You could
present them with a diagnosis for terminal cancer and three months to live and
they would only pass you for ESA if that
condition triggered 15 points worth of descriptors, regardless of how you feel.
When it comes to mental health, which is largely invisible and poorly
understood, even by GP’s (who thus rely on diagnoses, as here), this approach
is woefully inadequate: conditions fluctuate and are difficult to explain or
pin down. This leaves individuals caught, once again, in the zone of
uncertainty this deficient system creates.
I hope I have explained this well
enough. It’s difficult to really parse because it’s subtle. In many ways it
makes sense to assess what a person can or can’t do, but the problem is how. By
editing the descriptors and setting the goalposts how you like you, as
architect of this system, have free reign to determine who passes and who doesn’t.
But remember, ESA is meant to be for people
who need help – even if they can, or are even in, work. It is called Employment
SUPPORT Allowance; not Incapacity Benefit.
No comments:
Post a Comment