ESA - ATOS - Work - Benefits

Paull - when you have had 30 years IN the workplace, dealing with the constant excessive stress then come back and tell us we shouldn't be on benefit.  It is the work place that has weakened me and made it impossible for me to cope with interactions with people, not being on benefits.  I don't feel entitled to benefit, I would prefer to be paid for work.  You are wrong to assume it always makes people lazy. You listen too much to lies in the media. I am up by 6 am and I do what I can. Not everything that is valuable is paid for. You make too many assuptions about people you do not know.

We get this sort of unthinking critisism from other people we don't need it here. I and others come here for support.

Paull, I trust you are deserving then? Because someone else might call you undeserving!

Your post is very judgmental.

I would love to work / go back into education; but in the last 12 months I have expeirenced the following:

- refusal to make reasonable adjustments

- lack of support

- being told there's nothing wrong with me

How can people be expected to get back into work if they experience the above? Oh, and all those happened twice within the last year.

There is also no support at all to help get disabled people back into work. We're pushed on to courses which are inaccessible.

Lots of good and bad points - would need to write a thesis to go through every reply and I don't have time sorry. Yes, I have ASC - and related hyperacusis.

Many people have their own problems (sorry to confound them all into one word but I mean anything physical/mental/on the spectrum etc) and everyone has their own needs and way of thinking - the points I am trying to make are :-

1) Those with problems that want to work in many cases need specific needs taken into account. While an obvious physical disability can be seen and catered for, many people on the spectrum have issues that can't be seen and are therefore often overlooked.

2) If someone has been out of work for a long time and then find themselves being pushed into work then (in my opinion), some want to fight in order not to work despite them being able to do some kind of work, obviously this can be because they feel their issues in the workplace are not being addressed or simply because it's easier to not have to face those issues and in some cases simply because they have got used to being provided for.

3) There should be no exact line between either being able or being unable to work - this just creates a scenario where people fight to be on one side of the line while the government (in the interests of the countries finanaces) fights to get them on the other side of the line.

4) No human being should expect help and should always at least try to help themselves no matter what problems they have. The government is right in wanting to get people with problems (sorry for the generalisation) into work but is going the wrong way about it.

Having problems should not mean being able to benefit from them or use them as a reason to escape from the harsh realities of life and having to strive to provide for oneself. In our society it's easy for those with problems to choose the easy route and it's these kind of people that pushes the government into taking a harder stance which makes it more unfair on those who have more severe issues.

Being provided for makes people weaker because they have the choice not to have to do things, they can become lazy and expect things rather than have to do things to survive. Struggle makes people stronger, so no matter what problems someone has they should always try their best to overcome them rather that just accept help easily.

And that is the most depressing thing of all, the closed minds.  The people who influence things will never ask us, and will never understand us (and I'm not talking diagnostic criteria - although those need amending too) or what we actually need.

We will continue to be marginalised, feel defective and eventually isolating ourselves to various degrees after failing to cope because of not being understood.

Longman, you should join the professionals forum and try to get them to listen:

http://network.autism.org.uk/welcome?pageback=http%3A//network.autism.org.uk/

Keep nudging away longman

Doesn't work like that. The people who decide how we are diagnosed, what meets autistic spectrum criteria and what doesn't, what rights we have to question their verdicts etc., think themselves scientists.

There is unfortunately more to being a scientist than many would-be scientists realise, because you should be thinking in a balanced observant manner, whereas most "scientists" (while they might deny it) work from preconceived ideas and rules or theories set up to help us understand that end up as inflexible codes. Many people confuse theory with reality, forgetting which aspects they have "fixed" in order to generate the theories. Few are capable of unbiased observation of the evidence of real process, only a controlled and limited laboratory measurement.

Science is pursued by cohorts of researchers working within one sector, publishing for that sector, though there may be overlaps. But to be involved in discussions with or within any one cohort is to have privileged, trusted access. This means again that change, new ideas, new ways of viewing things, "thinking outside the box" rarely reach these hermetically sealed think tanks. They can be incredibly hostile to anyone outside their circle questioning or criticising them. You have to know the right jargon, and have the right credibility.

Its a bit like autism in fact. Life is hard if you don't know the social codes. Except we are faced with these difficulties as individuals. These are groups of NTs who act collectively as if they had group autism.

Most of the "scientists" who deal with our issues think they are scientists, but fail to think objectivwely and rationally. They fall into the trap of being little isolated cells of specialists, blimkered, stubborn, resistant to outside contact. really the worst people who could ever be let loose on our concerns.

The fact you or I can think outside the box is irrelevant to these people. We are imperfect in their eyes. People suffering from autism, in their opinion, aren't capable of having an input.

Someone with a high scientific rating and credibility, who had aspergers or hfasd and was open about it, might be able to make a difference. We don't count. The fact we have aspergers is their reason for forming a scientific cluster, but we as individuals aren't important to them, we're just data for their chosen research topic.

With these people, proper scientific principles are really quite alien to them. They just wouldn't understand.

While my specialisms differ, I've worked with many such people. their theories are to them infallible. The fact that things happen differently are quite beyond their comprehension. Most are looking for a quick fix to get a high career profile. Spending years observing dispassionately doesn't make careers.

Why?  The Aspie mind is meant to be good at thinking outside of the box, creatively.  Just putting suggestions out there for consideration (that NT's would not have thought of) will give them a lightbulb moment (hopefully) on a new angle.  Why does it have to be an idea based on you being "one of them"?  A cardiac surgeon doesn't come up with surgical techniques because he had a heart attack.

And of course there are always other possibilities if you want to back your point up further, such as saying I have a family member with autism (which isn't a lie if you think about it) and you asked their opinion, and it's not as if all the Aspies in positions to make a difference are even diagnosed anyway.  Some may be undiagnosed and just aware of feeling different and come up with "Aspie ideas" accordingly, to influence policies.

In the film "My Big Fat Greek Wedding", the wife said to the daughter that her husband may be the head of the family, but she is the neck, and she can turn that head any way she wants.

Some of these arrogant types also love to steal an idea as if it were their own, by a subtle suggestion in the right way, they will take all the credit for your idea.

(I'm beginning to sound NT with all these games! )

You cannot influence policy unless you have a stand point.

If you don't have a standpoint like "I've got aspergers" or "I've got three degrees in it", how do you expect to stand up to the experts (or so-called experts) that at present are blocking our way to getting a proper and meaningful understanding of our situation?

Skinning cats ain't helping.... however many ways.....

I knew I was going wrong somewhere....I'm at least in a position to influence things at county level albeit not any higher. But I'm finding it very difficult and hard to see a way forward.

Perhaps if I go to a meeting and skin a cat the right way...........

At least they'll know I'm serious........

They wouldn't have to announce their own autistic status to influence policy..."there are many ways to skin a cat" as they say.

There probably are people in decision making positions in Government or related central bodies.  There are certainly professors, and lawyers, and top scientists and engineers with it, so why not key people in Government?

It is just not in their best interests to be open about it - it doesn't suit their careers which will not flourish if they have a "skeleton in the cupboard" which autism spectrum is, going by public perception of what it means.

Also they are caught out by the definition of autistic spectrum. We are prisoners of this concept that, if you achieve you're no longer on the autistic spectrum.

It is the daftest idea but it prevails. You have to be visibly suffering from secondaries and comorbid conditions to qualify as being on the spectrum. If you look alright, you haven't got a problem - apparently. No regard is paid to the fact people may be striving and coping and finding ways of achieving despite the setbacks of having an autistic spectrum disorder.

Conversely its not in anyone's best interests to show any signs of getting better!

No-one seems concerned that suicide rates amongst people with good coping strategies are high. If you have good coping strategies you can blend in better with NTs but that has huge stress implications, the risk of burn-out and crisis. But the system prefers to pretend this cannot happen.

So anyone who is an achiever (maybe apart from some Oxford and Cambridge Dons for whom it might appear an advantage, if indeed that's more than a myth) has to keep quiet about their autism spectrum diagnosis.

Which means there's no point in trying to get any more into high places. They will all clam up if they do.

You can be "out" about dyslexia (or almost anything else), but autism sadly still carries stigma, because it doesn't suit society (especially in ecomically rerstrained times) to properly recognise the condition).

Which brings me back to the original poster in this thread. Why wont he say where he is coming from......

Bearing arms won't solve the issue, you have to be certified as mentally stable anyway and many of us have anxiety, depression and other co-morbid mental health issues.   If we went waving weapons around they'd just lock us up.

A specialist job list wouldn't help much either if you have NT colleagues who are difficult to socialise with and who have no understanding or sympathy for your differences.  It's often not the work but the social expectations and shenanigans that cause problems for people on the spectrum.

What would be good, would be some autistic people in government so that our perspective is taken into account in policies and laws.

I would like to see a DWP specialist job list for autism and other disabilities, in lieu of competing with the masses. Put in the job structure were your "get a job" mouth is Mr/Mrs.Government. 

There is some excellent points in the posting, from Aspie Burnout to Bullying all very relevent.

But sometimes,, I just think,, it works on RIGHT WE NEED TO CUT BILLIONS,, cut, cut, cut !  cut from the weakest link,, Tory NAZI party survivial of the fittest politics and you can also find another cheap slave for the capitalist mineshaft, if not import more cheap slaves.

I know this is a bit strong,, but BRITAIN DOES NEED A SOCIAL REVOLUTION. Start writing to your MP's and local council for the right to campaign for the right to bear arms.

Forgive me for my strong view,, but I am sick of a fiscal system which makes out the poor and vulnerable are to blame for a countries economical and social failures. Whereas it is the one cutting which should be cut, as they have not governed the country correctly, throwing vulnerable people of the boat as Titanic sinks is no lifeline to anyone.  

The other thing I ought to have mentioned is bullying in the workplace. It's a universal problem and really saps our national productivity and national credibility that we actually delude ourselves into believing that it is toughening, good for the "stiff upper lip" and all that other rubbish we delude ourselves with.

Most jobs are hell for most people working in them, because management in this country "turns a blind eye" - ignores it or fails to act. (And of course managers get promoted in this country for all the wrong reasons - seldom for being good at the job). 

For people on the spectrum, who have difficulties with social interaction and in reading situations, and who may appear odd or eccentric, we bear the brunt of a lot of that workplace bullying. That makes it really hard to do a job.

A good illustration is The Office, the comedy series. Who gets picked on most?  The nerds, the socially inhibited....

Can you provide a solution to that Paull?

I was hoping Paull might just tell us if he was affected by autism or aspergers, or is criticising from outside.

While I managed a career, being at the manageable end, it was not without considerable difficulty, and many constraints and barriers that limited what I could do. I was just very very lucky that after a late start I managed to get the qualifications that gave me more choice of do-able jobs.

What bugged me most was fitting in in the workplace, which is not easy if you have difficulties with social interaction. Most jobs expect you to fit in with the team. There doesn't seem to be any change in this requirement to make it easier for people on the spectrum - to be honest if someone can do a good job why do they need to be able to socialise to get on? And to progress into management you have to have a partner to go to social events with - aurism aside many single people lose out on promotion - what's that got to do with doing a good job?

And of course team work nowadays is crucial. There aren't any back office little job in a corener opportunities these days. Team work is not easy for someone on the spectrum.

Interviews are another key problem. It is said that trhe first few minutes of an interview are crucial, and decisions are often made then. Appearances in terms of how you dress, how you make eye contact, what you say in the first minutes, whether you sit still of fidget, are all crucial. So people on the spectrum may find themselves at a dreadful disadvantage.

Then there's whether you tell people about it. Lack of public understanding of autistic spectrum often means you won't get short listed if you declare; you might not be taken seriously if you don't and odd behaviourisms show through.

Most jobs have a broad range of skills. People on the spectrum may excel at some, but fall short on others. There's not yet a mechanism for being allowed to focus on what you do well. Most jobs nowadays involve rotation - changes of job role to give everyone a share of experiences.

I can comment on this regarding Higher Education - degrees still require completion of the whole curriculum. There are few options for part curriculum, so you cannot just do what you are good at.

As I said at the start I'd like Paull to say if his perspective is that of someone on the spectrum, or someone related to someone else on the spectrum, or a carer or someone who works with people on the spectrum. If he isn't in the know as to what it is like, I think at least he should say so.

It is easy to moralise Paull if you are in the "I'm alright Jack" (ie not personally affected) position. The trouble is people on the spectrum encounter very real barriers, many of which could be overcome if employers gave us a bit more leaway!

That's a good point stranger.

The reasonable adjustments we are entitled to in law, according to the Equality Act 2010 are very difficult to get in practice.

I am trying to get reasonable adjustments with my GP surgery and so far they are refusing, despite me quoting the law to them.  So if the NHS is ignoring the law what hope do people have of a lot of employer's following it?

Disability is supposed to give you the right to reasonable adjustments to enable you to be on a level footing with non-disabled people in the worpkplace, so if you don't get them you are automatically being discriminated against and it is so much harder for you to perform in a work role.

There is nothing wrong with having a positive attitude of course, but not at the cost of ignoring the reality of the situation and the limits that places on you.

Without knowing if you have autism or not it's hard to know your underlying motive for posting this.  However "these people" which you repeatedly use, sounds pretty hardline and discriminatory.

You may have overcome certain difficulties, but you cannot judge others as not all others will be so fortunate.

I agree that there are some benefits scroungers, able-bodied and no doubt disabled too.  But until you have "walked in another man's shoes" you cannot judge so harshly.

I think people are harder on psychological difficulties than they are physical difficulties.  The mind is a powerful thing, and the mind can break just like the body.

And don't you think some people did work and pay into the system before becoming unable to, and it may have been that for some, it was (especially in the case of ASCs) trying to "do their bit" and perform like others in society that actually broke them psychologically and made them unable to work?

There is a generation or more of people with ASCs who were not diagnosed and lived a painfully difficult existence as such, resulting in severe mental health difficulties.

Suzanne C. Lawton refers to Aspie burnout as the Asperger middle-age burnout in her book Asperger Syndrome: Natural Steps Toward a Better Life for You or Your Child.

People like this cannot simply "pull themselves together" as you imply.  You also seem to think that everyone claiming benefits has always done so, which is simply not true.  There are many people out there who worked hard for years before becoming physically disabled (some through work accidents) or struggled with neurological or psychological differences until they could no longer.

You have a very simplistic view and I'm pleased you saw the error of your own ways, but that doesn't mean that everyone else is making the same error you did.