Atos/WCA documentary's

Scorpion0x17 said:

It's like saying "I have a red apple, and I've only ever seen red apples, therefore all apples must be red".

You simply can not take one, a hundred, or even a thousand, examples of a lack of compassion and simply extrapolate that out to all cases.

But there is a whole world of difference between some jerk being a jerk in a WCA, and someone carting off jews, gays, and the disabled to be gassed, during WWII.

When we're being carted of to the gas chambers, then I'll agree with you.

It is also an offense to those that did die at the hands the nazi machine during the holocaust.

Now, I'm sure you know that neither of us has access to the information, or the resources, to actually conduct such research in the proper manner, so suggesting such a thing is really quite pointless.

Labelling all WCA assessors as discompassionate is as bad as labelling all benefits claiments as scroungers.

Again I will try to explain, I never made any direct comparison between jews, gas chambers and this issue, It was not my analogy,

I have never mentioned either of those words until now in response to you, I already explained my comparison, if I didn’t make it clear I am sorry about that, but I am trying to explain something via computer here and you know for us neurotypicals its not always that easy to do

My comparison was on the issue of compassion and the justification of them ‘doing their job’ not anything else, and as the comparison was not mine to begin with i dont feel i "offended" anyone, it was there, i saw it, if that is an offense i cant do much about that

I have had several of these “interviews” over the last few years, with different “interviewers” and I had many long before they changed, I have been on long term disability for many years, so I kinda know a wee bit about when and what changed about the system, and the people interviewing

And so Im not taking “one” example, but it doesn’t really matter, you have your views on it, and you can only go based on your experience

To be honest, I had to research that to appeal my own claim, its easy, type in atos/complaints/interview you get thousands of them, all saying the same things, or visit your local mp, who will no doubt have been inundated, as ours had said he was, with atos “interview” complaints

This isn’t a “one off or a few” we all wish it was, this has been happening all over Britain

I have to point out, probably a bit pedantically, that I have never said “all” about atos, I said all in general, about the system and “all” of these issues, I apologise if I didn’t make that clear it was in reference you having said this “I mean when the politicians say one thing, the DWP another, and Atos yet another, who are you meant to believe?”

When it comes to atos “interviews”, I maintain its the majority but not necessarily not “all”

Scorpion0x17 said:

I don't know just how many times I need to repeat this simple idea for you to get it, but I'll try again

Theres no need to be rude over it

But, if they are hired and told what to do, it seems to be logical that they will ,as a majority ,do it, as we both agree its their job to do it, they will be fired if they don’t, and thats even if its not the way they normally are

So whether its “all” literally or not, is far too many, and far too many people are being treated unfairly for no reason , I hope we can at least agree on that and leave it there

You are too unwell to work at this point in time, therefore we will leave you alone for you to have sufficient respite. If you feel you are capable of work, you can end you claim and start employment. Whilst on this benifit you can go to college, university or attend a course that will help your health and you chances of sustainable employment. However should you not acheive due to your health you can fall back on to you Incapacity benifit. You will have a medical by a panel of fully qualified GP's to ensure you are not making a false claim ocasionally.

or

We need to reduce the national debt and taxpayers hate the concept of something for nothing (if they're not in on it). So were redesigning the system so your entitled to less. We will make WCA manditory, we will asses your positive strength's and manipulate your limited quality of life to our ends. We will offer you support (code name harrass you and make you feel guilty) back in to employment. The employment we offer will be trivial, usually temporary and farly meaningless but you should be gratefull that anyone wants you at all. Once your in employment we will make it extremely difficult for you to reclaim benifits if it doesnt work out. If you want to do a course to help you get sustainable employment well thats your problem, other people do it themselves, being disabled isnt a privledge. When you are assesed will cause you maximum anxiety, treat you like the turd you are and remember with ESA were "In this Together". 

Now there been a massive rise in people being referred to IMHS in my area since ESA and WCA was introduced. Granted there is a recesion too, however my GF's MH worker claims there case load has more than tripple since the introduction of the new systems. People who have physical disabilities are having more attempts at ending it all, people with chronic health complaints are suffer anxiety and depression due to failing a clealy flawed test according to the people in IMHS I come into contact with.

That's my take on the situation. But remember "Were in this together".

I dunno, maybe it's just me, but I find "We recognise that you want to work, but require, and can offer you, support, even if it is somewhat limited, in achieving that" (ESA) far better than "You have been deemed never fit to work ever again, please go and sit quitely on the rubbish heap of life" (IB).

I was given one of these assessments ages ago. I thought the assessment itself was very poor, the main thing I can remember is a series of simple mental arithmetic questions. I was surprised when they decided in my favour without need for appeal.

Likewise, my mother was recently being moved from Income Support due to incapacity, over to ESA. It's fair to say she had come the wrong side of these assessments previously and needed to appeal. However, there didn't seem to be an issue this time around. I guess it could have been because of the previous appeal etc. However, my partner's Dad recently had such an assessment and wasn't successful.

To be completely fair, I would say I and my mother are actually capable of work to some extent. The problem, as always, being whether someone would actually employ me. Fortunately I am starting a job soon, after getting a lucky break through doing a work experience placement - I still have not, and probably never will, get a job off the back of an interview. I think it would do a world of good for my mother to be doing something with her life, and to have a purpose. However, again, the problem is whether anyone would employ her - and I doubt they would. So forcing her to go on the job market probably wouldn't be a good thing, as it would cause more harm than good. The way the system works, with two groups as a not expected to work, and expected to work, if you're in the not expected to work group, then clearly you're written off. There should definitely be some sort of help available to those who want it and are in the not expected to work group.

In some ways, the *** were more humane than the WCAs. At least when you're rounded up, gassed and dead, you don't have to live with the mental anguish and torture inflicted by the system. (I know that's a gross over-simplification, and will be an unpopular view - but you got to admit it has *some* validity, if you ever see the anguish these things put people through.)

While the goverment continues to demonise a specific group I will 1000% persist with Nazi analogy's.

The template is similar, however the final result isnt as extreme. The final solution to the disabilty problem. Systematic degredation as a result of governmental command. 

It starts by creating hatred within the populous towards a group, it make's a said group live in fear. Look at the collective responsibility and the way that the condoms are using it now "were in this together". mmm Im sure collective responsibility was a favourite in the kingdom of bavaria before becoming particulary popular along the Polish/Ukrainian borders and the hotspot in the south of Poland. Im not being histerical and labeling everyone who disagrees with my philosophy a Nazi, I'm pointing out that the methodology of the system is remarkably similar. I don't even brand every racist a Nazi.

Why was there not this level of kickback with the older system? Because It was fairer, I knew people who failed medicals on the old system but they didn't feel so aggrieved. People did not feel it was results driven. People thought the assesors were compasionate. People may have disagreed with results, but now we have a system that is dispised by those who it is supposedly there to help. The system was flawed but working, lets create a new system with more flaws that doesnt work, what a splendid idea.

One thing I can say is none of the current UK political party's have the efficiency of the Germans.

PS my GF had a positive outcome in the respect she wasn't messed about, but the methods used were not particulat benificial to her health. Infact detrimental as she started to question her role and validity in society. Under the previous system she did not experience this as she had faith in the system. I don't think anyone at all is against the concept of a medical.

some one said:

fair enough, you have your views and expriences i have mine, all i know is the majority of experiences i hear about, via people i know or stories from ducumentaries , have been negative, its good you had a positive one, but sadly its rare for most of us

Well, yes. That is the nature of these things. People who have a good experience don't complain because, well, there's nothing to complain about!

So you do only ever hear about the bad experiences. However it is a logical fallacy to go from "I only hear about bad experiences" to "all interviewers must lack compassion because all I ever hear about is a lack of compassion".

It's like saying "I have a red apple, and I've only ever seen red apples, therefore all apples must be red".

Which is patently untrue.

You simply can not take one, a hundred, or even a thousand, examples of a lack of compassion and simply extrapolate that out to all cases.

some one said:

as for the analogy, i merely suggested we go with it, it was not my analogy, i didn't create i just went with it

if you have a problem with that analogy talk to the person who brought it up, i merely suggested 2 things,

its about comparison to having compassion and no or little compassiosn for the "interviewee"

, and the fact that 'doing their job' is never an excuse to treat people badly

No it's not, and I'm not saying it is.

But there is a whole world of difference between some jerk being a jerk in a WCA, and someone carting off jews, gays, and the disabled to be gassed, during WWII.

some one said:

as we are on a form on autism, an issue which faces lots of discrimination because of the issues related to it, id woould have thought it was relevant

When we're being carted of to the gas chambers, then I'll agree with you.

some one said:

if its your view that it is "belittling and lowering" to compare

No, I said it belittles oneself to use such a comparison.

It is also an offense to those that did die at the hands the nazi machine during the holocaust.

some one said:

all i ask is you research just how many people are afected by atos "interviews" and ask them directly why they were affected

And I ask you to research just how many people have had a positive outcome from the WCA assessments, and ask them how it was for them.

Now, I'm sure you know that neither of us has access to the information, or the resources, to actually conduct such research in the proper manner, so suggesting such a thing is really quite pointless.

some one said:

we have had a system for a long time, but it wasnt always this way, something changed and who they began to hire changed, and why they hired them

I agree the system changed, however I don't believe that the people doing the assessments now are significantly different to the people that did the assessments previously. Again, it is the system that is at fault here. Not the people.

Labelling all WCA assessors as discompassionate is as bad as labelling all benefits claiments as scroungers.

I don't know just how many times I need to repeat this simple idea for you to get it, but I'll try again: Just because one or two people within a larger group conform to a certain stereotype that does not mean that all of them do!

If we are to have any legitimacy in our fight against denegration by a system that tries to label us in such a manner, then we must raise ourselves, our standards, and our opinions, above those of the enemy we face.