Sunday, November 27, 2022

Blogpsot: “Frankly I don’t believe Doyle-Price or Billington give ATOS” says Mr Perrin

Blogpost: “A word in your ear” by Mr Perrin

“WHILST the daily parade of the sick and disabled, as ordered by the Department of Work and Pensions, continues to report to designated ATOS assessment centres our current Member of Parliament, Ms Jackie Doyle-Price and the Labour Party parliamentary candidate, Ms Polly Billington appear to have little, if any, interest or concern regarding the fear and distress caused to vulnerable members of the community.

Their silence on the subject has been deafening. I asked Jackie Doyle-Price why the Government felt they had to pay millions of pounds to a private company to carry out these assessments instead of, at a miniscule fraction of the cost, accept the opinions of the Doctors, Psychiatrists and Carers who are far better qualified to assess a person, they know and have been treating, in some cases for many years, regarding his/her capability and fitness to work. Her answer was that GPs, Psychiatrists and Carers could not be relied upon to give an “unbiased” opinion. I take that to mean that they could not be relied upon to give an assessment that accords with the Government’s intention to put these “layabouts” to work, whatever the cost to their health and wellbeing, thereby cutting the benefits bill at the expense of the mentally sick and disabled.

As for Ms Polly Billington, she appears to be far more concerned with” equal rights” for women at the expense of equal rights for men. I speak, of course, of the shameful policy of so called “positive discrimination” and the hypocrisy of those, like Ms Billington, who condemn, rightly so, other forms of discrimination or denials of equality whilst at the same time extolling the virtue of “positive” discrimination. But then she would, wouldn’t she? She is the prospective parliamentary candidate having been selected from a “women only” shortlist. In my opinion that is blatant discrimination and denial of the equal rights of a male candidate.

Ms Billington and her female friends tell us how much better governed the country would be if only there were more women in parliament. How come these same women are harshly critical of the only woman who did actually govern the country and condemn her for her controversial and divisive policies? However, there is one kind of “positive” discrimination I could be persuaded to support namely concerning MPs expenses. I have no objection to expenses such as travel or overnight lodgings but I believe it is outrageous to expect the taxpayer to provide a fully furnished property which, when no longer an MP, he/she can sell probably at a huge profit. If MPs travel from constituencies which are a certain distance from Westminster and are required to stay in London for two or three nights then it is right they should be reimbursed for hotel /lodging expenses. Or, just a thought, how about converting some empty building into a hostel for MPs.

2 COMMENTS

  1. Comment added on behalf of GT

    Ms Doyle-Price is mistaken in her belief that health professionals such as GPs, consultants, and all the myriad others who provide care and documentation for people in their illnesses, can not be relied upon to be “unbiased”. Quite the reverse in fact, as the truth of the matter is that they can’t be relied upon to be “biased” in the particular way that this government wishes.

    In various postings on my blog, and in a more comprehensive article on this subject, I demonstrate just how unobjectively biased the whole of the ESA regs are towards finding the sick ‘fit for work’, with examples of statements which illustrate this. Also wording is slanted in this direction in the ‘guidance’ given to those ‘healthcare professionals’, most of them nurses, who choose employment as WCA assessors for Atos. Further, there has been a concerted and ongoing campaign directed at GPs to try to get them to re-orient their thinking around sickness to bring it in line with the Atos model. Thankfully, they regretfully report, most GPs are reluctant to do so.

    This is my ‘big’ piece: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/32109159/Illness%20as%20Deviance.pdf
    At “14.Atos Training Methods” I discuss the ‘loaded’ instructions in the government literature, and the way in which Atos assessors’ training directs them to put the claimant’s behaviour ‘under a microscope’ in order to uncover ‘inconsistencies’ between their claimed incapacity and what the assessor observes. The hidden agenda within the WCA is the ‘informal questioning’ (superficially innocuous, such as “Do you watch TV? Do you have a pet?) coupled with close observation of the subject’s behaviour during assessment. Such comments made about them in this respect (despite having no objective medical basis) are given superior weight, (over any medical evidence presented) within the report sent to the DWP ‘Decision Maker’, and on which they make their final judgement. As I suggest, it’s not very dissimilar to the techniques employed during police interrogations.

    Some evidence of the government’s attempt to influence GPs away from their hippocratic committment to ‘first do no harm’ to their patients is contained within this further post, under the subheading “SNORB – Indoctrination for the doctors”:
    http://downwithallthat.wordpress.com/2012/09/21/my-response-to-professor-aylwards-statements-to-bt-and-dpac/

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Latest

More articles