Sick? Who gives Atos?

[TrueBlueTerrier]

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigation ... -atos.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Tough tests for sickness benefit are "all about saving lives not saving money", claims Employment Minister Chris Grayling.

He might try telling that to the family of one father who died after being told to get a job as his heart condition wasn't "life-threatening".

We constantly hear about the sicknote fakers who screw the system then get caught running a marathon or playing in their local Sunday football league.

But not about the tens of thousands of genuinely sick people who are turned down for the new Employment Support Allowance benefit but go on to appeal and win.

It's not a handout - if you work you pay national insurance to qualify for this benefit should you ever be unlucky enough to need it.

George, from Chesterfield, Derbyshire, worked all his life, first as a miner and foundry worker, then as a communications engineer, until a heart attack in 2006 when he was 53.

After a brief stint working self-employed his doctor told him to stop and George applied for ESA.

It's worth £91 to £97 a week but like everyone else George got £65 a week - the equivalent to Jobseeker's Allowance - for three months while he waited for his "work capability assessment".

These tests, carried out under a £100million a year contract by private firm Atos Origin, were introduced by the last government.

They've been finding up to two in three applicants are "fit to work" - but many appeal and 40% are successful.

In George's 39-minute exam, the "disability analyst" noted that George had angina, heart disease and chest pain, even when resting.

But this wasn't "uncontrollable or life-threatening" and George "should be able to walk at least 200 metres".

Atos's report went to the Department for Work and Pensions, where George's heart problems were ignored and he got six sick "points", as he could only stand up for less than half an hour due to pain.

Short of the 15 points needed to get ESA, George was put on Jobseeker's Allowance and told to find work.

He appealed, waiting eight months for his case to go to an independent tribunal. There George got nine more points, as he could only walk 100 metres before stopping.

He was put on the "work related activity" group where he got the lower rate of benefit and special help finding a suitable job.

But months later George collapsed and died of a heart attack, the day before another Atos medical. His widow is convinced the stress of claiming killed him.

We've got no time for spongers who milk the system and no problem with medical tests - as long as they're fair.

Professor Malcolm Harrison, of the University of Leeds, was asked to review the Atos tests by the Government last year.

He found they needed to be made "fairer and more effective". Currently the system is "impersonal, mechanistic and lacking in clarity".

Poor decisions were blamed on lack of time and common sense.

When the Royal Mail paid Atos to assess postman Garry Hollingworth they said he should be medically retired. But just weeks later, when they assessed again him for ESA, Atos gave him zero points and passed him fit for work.

Colin Hampton of the Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centre (above) says he's had four identical cases.

He's dealing with hundreds of appeals with a 70% success rate, including people with lung cancer, brain tumours, asbestosis, cerebral palsy and spina bifida.

But last month the local Tory council scrapped the centre's £35,000 annual grant.

And the Government insists it's not about saving money.

[millsy]

dont talk to me about ATOS i had an accident in work broken bones 4months off and now they want to medical retire me what a Fjoke. said i would not be able to work again and is unfit for work, huuuuhhhh bones heal you weird looking doctor!! i am not diseaesed or a cripple.

[stokes11eg]

: Add to that the 'back to work' meetings with mostly American run companies! I do a bit of voluntary work, and last year on a number of occassions, I accompanied a person to these. What I witnessed shocked me to the core. (and prompted me to write a national newspaper who published my letter) The surroundings are luxurious by the way, and their magazine looks to be promoting a health spa, what with on site physios, etc, etc! But,the bullying (they would say motivational' attitude was horrendous. One young lad had both arms in plaster casts, and this big spammy american gent, in full voice, went on and on. 'You WILL send out at least 50 applications a week--he shouted, he also supplied him with a map of the local industrial estate, and said you WILL go out and knock on these doors, and ask for work (TRUE) and you WILL prove to me you have been. This went on for more than half an hour.
The same attitude was adopted to all 'clients' some elderly, very sick, and unempolyable. To pay these companies billions of pounds to bully and intimidate folks is horrifying!

[fishtank]

They have used leeches and other such parasites in medicine for thousands of years....

[Lincox]

Yeah, but surely they didn,t have to dress them up as Royal mail management

[General Mannerheim]

The bit about the postman being medically retired and then found fit to work after having a DWP medical happened to me ON THE SAME DAY.
On going court case against these w*****s,uk goverment and what passes as justice is a feckin joke going to european. :dcfo :ncfo :vcfo

[millsy]

can you see them giving me my medical retirement( i dont want it) i have been there for 20 years, had an accident on duty will be fit for work in 5 weeks, medical ATOS doctor says that i am unfit for work and there is no work for me to do?? I just dont get it? Any ideas anyone if they can be this ruthless..

[norbert]

Disgraceful Treatment of Forces Veterans http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosveterans.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigation ... rigin.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://blogs.mirror.co.uk/investigation ... ys-no.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

http://dwpexamination.wordpress.com/are ... y-doctors/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Garry Hollingworth of Langwith worked for the Royal Mail as a postman. He was off work for ten months with a serious heart condition. Royal Mail employed Atos to carry out a medical assessment on Garry. They concluded that ‘His mobility is restricted up to a few minutes by breathlessness, angina and leg pains’. They went on to say ‘Mr Hollingworth remains unfit for work in any capacity and I doubt he will be able to work again. There is no foreseeable return date and no adjustments that would facilitate his return at this stage’.

The Atos report stated that not only is he permanently incapable of carrying out the duties of his present post but also working for any other employer. They concluded that he would meet the criteria for medical retirement.

Weeks later, Mr Hollingworth had to attend a Work Capability Assessment, a requirement when claiming the new Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have a multi million pound contract with Atos Origin to carry out work capability assessments with those claiming ESA.

Imagine Garry’s surprise when he was sent a letter by Atos telling him he did not have a limited capability for work. He had received 0 points (15 are required to claim the benefit) which means he would have to claim Job seeker’s allowance which is £65.45 as opposed to £96.85 on ESA. Mr Hollingworth appealed the decision and was then given 6 points. The Derbyshire Unemployed Workers’ Centres (DUWCs) helped him put in a new claim as his condition had worsened. Garry has had a fresh medical via Atos and has now been given 9 points. He will appeal the decision again.

The DUWCs have two more Royal Mail workers and one NHS employee who have all faced medical retirement at the hands of Atos only to be given 0 points when trying to claim the benefit to which they are entitled. One of these workers is still awaiting her appeal.


the LIMA software used ( Logic Integrated " Medical " " Assessment " ) is American Medical / Death Insurance developed by UMNA Provident ....basically they're a claims denial firm ...it doesn't matter how vague , curious , contradictory or obscure the reason is ....they'll wriggle out of not paying out . However in the free enterprise , land of the free , claimants have more rights than here ....so a $9 Million law suit was taken out against UMNA , subsequently they were banned from operating in three states.

UMNA Provident assisted ATOS Origin in their application for " medicals " , a " very colourful " City type with no experience of welfare benefits suggested using " independent " don't give ATOS as GP's / Consultants / Specialists have vested interests i.e. frightened of Ambulance chasing Solicitor Farming Firms or being reported to the General Medical Council ....it's similar to RM with the " you've got a " good doctor " hence all the playground BS from it's " managers " .

i'm not sure how a clearly corrupt , shoddy & amateurish outfit on bonuses and targets is more transparent using illogical and underhand methods though ? ...apparently it's very easy to put a negative complexion on things / provide wildly optimistic forecasts ...I'm not sure what these tests and questions used have to do with the real world of work either ? ! .

I've done some Googling and ATOSH have a terrible reputation on Benefits & Work , DWP Examination and Consumer Action Group etc ....all the horror stories in the threads / blogs have the same ring to them .

Apparently they are under orders to fail 75 % of claimants , come hell or high water , this is based on a survey by Sheffield Polytechnic ....sorry Hallam University ! that stated que surprise 75% of IB Claimants were apparently fit for work in the service / spiv economy of London / South East not the Post Industrial Northern Wasteland with attendant problems dating back to the 80's .

The mantra is if you've only the one leg / arm / eye you use the other one ...you'll only qualify for one ESA Support Group if you're house / bed / hospital/ wheelchair bound ...you may get in the other one if there's a good chance of turning your toes up in the next 18 months ...otherwise you'll have to sign on for dole with the rest of the great unwashed and look for non existent work.

During the trial scheme in Burnley ATOSH / DWP lost 4 out of 5 cases with advocacy , nearly half without .

Funny how you don't read this in The Daily Blackshirt / Pornographer Dirty Desmond's Express and Star or Murdoch's hysterical comic , The Sun for mouth breathers eh ? .

atos.jpg

[POSTMAN]

can you see them giving me my medical retirement( i dont want it) i have been there for 20 years, had an accident on duty will be fit for work in 5 weeks, medical ATOS doctor says that i am unfit for work and there is no work for me to do?? I just dont get it? Any ideas anyone if they can be this ruthless..

Well if you've had an AOD then surely you would be entitled to big money if you can't work for RM anymore.
Anyone know how that would work?

[whatamess!!]

can you see them giving me my medical retirement( i dont want it) i have been there for 20 years, had an accident on duty will be fit for work in 5 weeks, medical ATOS doctor says that i am unfit for work and there is no work for me to do?? I just dont get it? Any ideas anyone if they can be this ruthless..

Well if you've had an AOD then surely you would be entitled to big money if you can't work for RM anymore.
Anyone know how that would work?

Think you should get 12 months full paid sick leave anyway, so have the time off and when it's better go back, and not before

[norbert]

http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.d599 ... _el_250398" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

#
Letter from Dr Omar Najim on behalf of the Civil and Public Services Committee (CPSC) in response to the "Well Enough to Work?" article published week 8th Feb.

* Dr Omar Najim, Chairman of the Civil and Public Services Committee (CPSC)

BMA

Margaret McCartney's investigation of Atos Healthcare procedures is timely. There are some inaccuracies, however. No-one with evidence of terminal cancer should ever be disallowed benefit, but will qualify at the highest monetary rate under what are known as Special Rules. There is also misunderstanding over the approach of "Disability Analysis", which is a functional rather than a diagnostic assessment. This is necessary as many serious medical conditions can now be stabilised by modern treatment and some may enter a phase of remission. Thirdly, further medical evidence is frequently sought from the GP but is difficult to obtain in the required time scale. Nor does it always provide up to date information about present functional ability, especially when the patient has not been recently seen.

These caveats aside, Dr McCartney's article raises valid and important points. She asks if we can be confident that Atos doctors are doing their professional duty with respect to reports. We wish to report two serious matters which have emerged in feedback from our members engaged in this work and which appear to amplify these concerns.

Firstly, doctors are now in a minority in the Atos workforce. Nurse practitioners exceed them in a cost-cutting trend that is likely to continue. Furthermore, many of the doctors are EU recruits and less likely to remain in the job over the long-term. The attrition rate of medical personnel is high, but even higher among the nurses now making highly specialised assessments on benefit entitlement in lieu of doctors.

Secondly, all Atos medical personnel are subject to detailed monthly monitoring regarding the time taken over reports, the throughput, and the "quality" of their work (as assessed by software which our members regard as currently flawed). Included in these monthly statistics is the rate of likely disallowance of benefit and the number of times a Support Group (which is awarded the highest rate of benefit) is indicated. Although the final decision is made by the DWP decision maker the Harrington report has found that the Atos practitioner's report is rarely questioned at this stage Dr McCartney is correct in noting that the rate of disallowance has almost doubled since Employment Support Allowance (ESA) took over from Incapacity Benefit, and also that 40% of new ESA reports are currently being overturned by the Appeals Service. We have been told that pressure is being brought to bear on health care practitioners who do not achieve a stiff monthly disallowance rate target, although Atos denies that such targets exists.

Every individual practitioner is responsible for upholding an appropriate code of ethics, as both the GMC and NMC would confirm. In the case of Atos practitioners, we fear that this obligation is being made all the harder by the difficult circumstances in which they work.

Competing interests: None declared
Submit rapid response
Published 21 February 2011
#
How the DWP sees GPs

* Chik Collins, Senior Lecturer

School of Social Sciences, University of the West of Scotland

It is encouraging to see the BMJ not only publishing but actually commissioning Margaret McCartney's investigation of the Incapacity Benefit/Employment Support Allowance regime, and the role of Atos in providing medical reports to the DWP.

McCartney rightly draws attention to the explicit disregard shown within this regime to the advice provided by claimants' GPs. This is by no means something particular to the ESA regime - it seems to have been an established aspect of the IB regime ahead of the introduction of ESA. The following is an excerpt from a DWP 'decision maker's' submission to an IB appeal tribunal in Scotland in early 2009:

"The decision maker agreed with the findings of the approved health care professional, who examined [X] in respect of the personal capability assessment. ... It is my submission that the approved health care professional's report is a true account of the claimant's ability to perform normal daily functions, therefore, the report should be accepted. Commissioners have stated that the evidence of a medical adviser is both disinterested and informed and is normally to be preferred to that of the claimant's GP because the GP is likely to be subject to pressure from the claimant. Unless the appeal tribunal has doubts, the findings of the approved health care professional can be given full weight because the findings are based on skilled observation, clinical examination and history."

This seems to have been - indeed may still be - a standard form of words for submissions to appeals tribunals by the DWP. It indicates, as McCartney rightly says, that the role of the DWP decision maker is almost inevitably to rubber stamp the report of the "approved health care professional" (these days in the employ of Atos), because the decision maker is explicitly directed to distrust the most likely alternative source of medical advice. Indeed, the architect of the regime under New Labour, subsequently ennobled by the Conservatives - David Freud - described the idea of involving GPs in decisions as "ludicrous" (Daily Telegraph, 4th Feb 2008).

Given the DWP view that 'worklessness' is harmful to people, a further implication in all of this is that GPs' alleged tendency to capitulate to pressure from their patients, or to otherwise facilitate their 'worklessness', actively damages these individuals. GPs, that is, are seen to be harming their patients - and the intervention of the DWP and Atos is seen to be rescuing them from a damaging dependency.

In doing research at the behest of Oxfam with the Clydebank Independent Resource Centre (To Banker from Bankies: Incapacity Benefit - Myth and Realities, Oxfam, 2009) I encountered the inappropriate, wasteful and counterproductive operation of the 'welfare to work' programme. The logic of the system seemed to be much more about getting 'welfare to work' for the likes of Atos and the members of the Employment Related Services Association than about enabling claimants, in the rhetoric of the then government, to 'take control of their journey back to work'. Not infrequently it seemed that the whole, warped process proved so traumatic that people ended up more ill and further away from being able to work than they had been at the outset.

McCartney rightly highlights the questions of ethics and fairness for the medical profession to consider in all of this. But there is a further question about the surprisingly high level of tolerance so far displayed by the profession for the basic challenge to the status, legitimacy and integrity of its GP wing which has been mounted from within the DWP.

Competing interests: None declared

[millsy]

thanks for your responses, crap myself everytime the postman delivers my mail, thinking he will bring me bad news.
I was told that they only pay you 34 weeks money lump sum and no pension.
Pees me off when an accident happens and they seem to turn the blame on you, Really the witch of a doctor asked me do i often fall over, my reply was not unless it is someone elses fault and not my own..
i would of considered early retirement but in this economy and they way the counrty is i couldnt afford it.

[norbert]

Protest outside their offices now 'The medical was an absolute joke'

The government's reform of the disability benefits system has angered claimants, who say the new tests fail to identify why they can't work. Amelia Gentleman reports on the fallout of Cameron's war against 'sicknote culture'

*
o
o Share164
o Reddit
o Buzz up
*
Comments (15)

* Amelia Gentleman
*
o Amelia Gentleman
o The Guardian, Wednesday 23 February 2011
o Article history

Tony Elliott Tony Elliott: 'I was thinking, "I'm a human being, me"'. Photograph: Christopher Thomond for the Guardian

In the windy courtyard of a new glass-fronted office development, several dozen protesters, many in wheelchairs, spent an afternoon last month shouting angry chants against the government's reform of disability benefits. "We can't work! We can't play! What do they want us to do? Die?"

The protest was held in front of the London headquarters of the low-profile but powerful French-owned company Atos, responsible for a new and controversial computerised test used to judge whether benefit claimants are genuinely sick or merely skiving.

A surprisingly large number of police officers were on hand, and swiftly erected barriers around the protesters. Inside, employees in suits huddled at the window, peering down at the commotion. Protesters waved banners in the shape of coffins, marked with the slogan "Atos doesn't give a toss". A man warned through his megaphone: "We are being kettled. Disabled people are being kettled."

Given the intensity of anger among disability charities towards the reforms, many more of these demonstrations are expected in next few months, and senior members of the government are known to be anxious about the reaction of these groups to the looming change.

The automated Atos assessment is the focus of particular fury and alarm. Over the next three years, one and a half million people will have to undergo this new test. A complex computer program will help a team of "disability analysts" to rule on who is sufficiently fit for work.

People who have had no contact with the benefits system are unlikely to have heard of the Work Capability Assessment (WCA). Anyone with disabilities or serious ill-health will probably already have a detailed knowledge of the test's workings and its many alleged disturbing idiosyncrasies.

Aside from the question of whether a computer-led assessment is the best way to analyse someone's fitness, charities are uneasy with this particular test, describing it as a blunt and unsophisticated tool.

Since its preliminary rollout in 2008, people with terminal cancer have been found fit to work, people with mental health problems have complained their condition is not taken seriously, people with complex illnesses report that the tick-box system is not able to cope with the nuances of their problems. A revised, even more stringent version introduced this month means that blind and deaf people will no longer automatically receive sickness benefit, and are unlikely to qualify for extra help finding work.

The test is central part to the reform of incapacity benefit, seen both by the government and disability campaigners as outdated and in need of major overhaul. From the end of this month, it will be launched nationwide and there is great nervousness about what will happen once people start being reassessed at a rate of 11,000 a week.

To be found too unwell or incapacitated to work, individuals need to clock up 15 points during the 45-minute one-to-one assessment. If, for example, you can't pick up a £1 coin with either hand you get 15 points. Cannot learn or understand how to complete a simple task, such as setting an alarm clock? Also 15 points. Strangers have difficulty understanding your speech? Take six points.

Because of the way the questionnaire has been set, it is much harder to be classified as unfit for work under the new test than previously and, as a result, the reform is expected to save the government £1bn over five years. In pilots of the test, 30% fewer people have been found unfit for work and 70% fewer people have been found eligible for the full-rate unconditional support benefit. Already people have been told they don't qualify for benefits in much greater numbers than anticipated in government projections.

The test did not identify the array of problems that make life complicated for Matthew Hutchings, 36, and awarded him just six points, not enough to qualify for the benefit. Smiling and shy, he sits quietly as his parents Ray, a retired accountant, and Diane, a teacher, explain that he has had lifelong speech and language problems, is probably autistic, and has always had difficulties with grasping simple tasks.

"People have problems understanding him, he has problems with his speech, with his understanding and with his confidence. But it is a hidden thing, until you know him well. He's very vulnerable," his mother says.

When he was called for his disability test, his father accompanied him. "The assessment was farcical for someone like Matthew – it was all: Can you sit down? Can you stand up? Can you pick something up? He can do all those things, but that's not what the problem is," Ray says. "They asked if he could cook. I explained he couldn't, but that he was able to heat something up in a microwave. In the report they said he could cook."

His father appealed immediately against the judgment and six months later the case went to appeal. The tribunal judge ruled that Matthew was not capable of work, and awarded him 15 points.

The Daily Mail describes the new system as a "tough new test to weed out the workshy"; much media coverage of the revised test portrays claimants who are found fit for work as "scroungers" who have been "trying it on to get sickness benefit". Disability charities argue that, on the contrary, the government has tweaked the parameters of the test so that many severely ill and disabled people simply no longer qualify.

At the end of each session, the computer program generates a 25-page report summarising the person's general state of health, and fitness for work. People with severe health problems who have been given zero points say that they have told their assessors what was wrong with them, and been met with a computer-says-no response.

A man who has been registered blind since 2000 due to a hereditary degenerative sight condition was surprised to read his report's conclusion that "the client's level of disability would be expected to improve with time and appropriate treatment". "I'm losing sight all the time. When I complained, I had a letter that told me 'the information contained in the report is medically reasonable and appropriately justified,'" he says (he asked not to be named, to avoid complications with further claims). "It's meaningless. I've had no apology."

This is a problem that has exploded on to the desks of advice centres, MPs and charities around the country since the test was introduced for all new claimants of the benefit in 2008.

Some claimants say the tests are rushed and impersonal, carried out by staff who barely make eye contact because they are too busy inputting data into the computer. A government-ordered review acknowledges that the assessment has a lack of "empathy", describing the whole process as "impersonal, mechanistic and lacking in clarity", and recommended a string of changes. The Department for Work and Pensions promises that most of these changes will have been implemented by the time the retesting gets fully under way later this year, but charities remain unconvinced.

For disabled people or people with serious illnesses the prospect of having their health reassessed is causing growing unease and anger. This anger is directed both against the Department for Work and Pensions, which is continuing the reform of Incapacity Benefit started by the last government, but also against Atos, which is being paid about £100m a year to carry out the tests.
Tracey Oakley Tracey Oakley: 'I want to work, but who's going to employ me in this state?' Photograph: Christopher Thomond for the Guardian

The benefits system is notoriously complex, but to understand the growing alarm of disabled people, you need to take in a few key points.

Since 2008, anyone claiming sickness or disability-related benefits for the first time has been required to take the Atos-administered Work Capability Assessment (WCA); from the end of this month, all existing incapacity benefit claimants will be reassessed using this test, as the old benefit is phased out and a new system, employment support allowance (ESA), is brought in.

If they are awarded 15 points, they will be moved on to ESA, which has two levels – the support group, where claimants are judged to be too disabled or unwell to be expected to work, and the work-related activity group, where claimants are deemed to be capable of working, provided they are supported into employment.

If they don't score 15 points, they will be moved on to the regular jobseekers' allowance. This is around £25 a week less than incapacity benefit, and will leave people with their income cut by just over a quarter. This lower benefit also lacks the immediate, intensive support for getting back to work that ESA is designed to provide.

The new benefit is based on the principle of looking at what people are able to do, rather than concentrating on what they cannot do – a principle that disability campaigners mostly support. The theoretical goal is to help people who have some level of sickness or disability find appropriate work, rather writing them off as unfit in perpetuity.

The problem lies partly in the peculiar outcomes of the Atos test. In Chesterfield, Matthew Hutchings's MP, Toby Perkins (Labour), says this issue has occupied much of his time since he won his seat last May. "The evidence from people that I am seeing is that people that are clearly not fit for work are being identified as fit for work. The consequence of that is that poor people are £25 a week worse off."

Large numbers of people who have been through this test have been so amazed at being found fit to work that they have formally appealed. Tribunal judges are overturning around 40% of cases they see and this high level of success at appeal is interpreted by charities as proof that the original test is flawed.

Some charities also argue that the government has failed to appreciate how few jobs are available for people with disabilities or health problems, and point out that if people with health problems are moved from incapacity benefit of around £91 a week to jobseeker's allowance at £65 a week, but stand little chance of actually finding work, the net result is simply to impoverish them.

Staff at the Derbyshire Unemployed Workers' Centres in Chesterfield are supporting 400 people who are waiting to go to tribunal to contest their test findings. They have already helped Tracey Oakley, 40, a mother of three who used to work in a hospital kitchen. Sitting at her kitchen table, on two cushions, a walking stick to hand, she explains that she has been off work with severe back problems since 2008. Back problems are often cited as a sick-note culture phenomenon, an easy excuse for staying away from work, but it is very clear that Oakley is suffering.

She has had one operation on her back and is waiting for a second; in the meantime she is on high daily doses of morphine, diazepam and codeine. She is barely able to walk to the shops; her teenage children now do all the cooking because it is too painful for her to stand to prepare food.

Her doctor does not think she is fit to work, but she scored zero points in her assessment. "She bent me every way my body wasn't supposed to go. I was in tears by the end of it." Later a tribunal judge took only a few minutes to overturn the original decision. She has recently been through a second WCA, and is awaiting the outcome.

"When you get nought points, it makes you feel like you're lying," she says. "I've always worked, since I was 15. I want to work again but who's going to employ me in this state? It's very stressful."

The centres also supported a former mine worker who had heart disease following a heart attack, and had been told by his doctor to stop work, aged 59. He was awarded six points in his test, appealed against the finding, and was given enough extra points to qualify for the benefit. Five months later, he was called back for a new assessment, and complained of the frustration of having to go through the whole process again. He died of heart failure a day before the test appointment.

His family believe that the stress contributed to his death, according to Colin Hampton, co-ordinator of thecentres. "The government gives the impression that if everyone got up off their sick bed there would be jobs for them, but that is a load of bollocks, as everyone knows," he says. "This policy does not address the fact that there are no employers ready to take on people who have health-limiting problems. How many employers do you know who are willing to employ someone with a history of mental health problems?"
Paul Hadfield

[Stormproof]

do i often fall over

I was asked virtually the same question. He called me 'clumsy'. AOD 2009, slipped on ice/snow whilst delivering. I tripped up the doorstep at home in 2005 and broke my upper arm. I got my foot caught up in some strapex at work whilst carrying my mech and bruised my knee in 2004.
Am I really that clumsy?

[millsy]

Accidents do happen thats life!! But when some arsehole belittles you sat the other side of the desk, your hoping a bus would run them over,( 'oh dear it was an accident' and he got hit by a bus terrible accident...)As if theyve never had an accident or fallen over in there life??
Why do the post office turn there backs on us posties, we are not sat at a desk all day in the warm, we have an active job and always on the move facing everday life.. Walking or driving we have these active jobs in all weathers and conditions and never a thankyou!!