Category: Disability

  • Content warning – this article contains discussion around suicide and suicidal ideation 

    The mother of a benefit claimant who took her own life after the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) stopped her money may yet get more answers over her daughter’s death. This is because the Court of Appeal has given her the chance to challenge another court’s decision not to hold a second inquest into her passing. This further DWP court case means that more may come to light about the department’s role in what happened. People will be holding a vigil outside the court on the day the appeal starts.

    Jodey Whiting: failed by the DWP

    The Canary has documented what happened to Jodey Whiting and her mother Joy Dove’s fight for justice. Jodey was 42 when she took her own life on 21 February 2017. This happened after the DWP stopped her benefits – giving her her last payment three days before she died. It’s actions were despite Jodey being chronically ill and disabled – at times physically having restricted mobility and also living with severe psychological distress, to the point of having suicidal ideations.

    Previously, an independent government body ruled the DWP had failed Jodey repeatedly – especially in terms of safeguarding. However, all it did was force the DWP to pay compensation to Jodey’s family. No-one has ever examined the department’s role in her death properly – not even the coroner in Jodey’s first inquest.

    So, her mother Joy has been fighting for the truth ever since. She’s represented by Leigh Day solicitors. Three years ago, the Canary reported that Leigh Day noted in Jodey’s case that the DWP made repeated failings. It:

    • Failed to arrange a home visit for Whiting for her Work Capability Assessment (WCA). Instead, it arranged an appointment at an assessment centre. This was despite Whiting’s request for an assessment at home because she “rarely left the house due to her health”.
    • Did not take into consideration Whiting making it aware that she lived with “suicidal thoughts a lot of the time and could not cope with work or looking for work”.
    • Stopped Whiting’s Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) payments after she did not attend the WCA.
    • Did not complete a Mandatory Reconsideration of its decision to stop Whiting’s ESA until after her death.

    At the time, Joy had written to the government asking for a new inquest into Jodey’s death – specifically to look at the DWP’s actions. Her case then ended up in the High Court.

    Challenging the system

    In September 2021, three High Court judges ruled against a second inquest into Jodey’s death. They claimed this would “not be in the pubic interest” – saying the DWP’s role in her death was ‘speculative’. So, Joy challenged the High Court and appealed its decision. It refused to hear it – so she went to the Court of Appeal. It, however, granted Joy an appeal – and the court will now hear it on Tuesday 31 January. Campaign group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) will be taking action. It said in a statement:

    DPAC will be in solidarity with Joy Dove, mother of Jodey Whiting, for a silent vigil outside the Royal Courts of Justice on the morning of the first day of the appeal against the Court’s ruling against a second inquest into Jodey’s death.

    Join us from 9.15 – 10am on Tuesday 31st January outside the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2A 2LL

    Please wear dark clothes and bring a white flower. Please do not bring campaign banners at Joy’s request. We will have some photos of Jodey to hold.

    As Disability News Service (DNS) reported, Joy said she imagined that Jodey “has a big smile on her face”, knowing that the DWP may be nearer to facing justice over her death. If the Court of Appeal grants a second inquest, it may also serve as the beginnings of justice for the countless other people who have died on the watch of a department which was supposedly there to support them. Moreover, it’s another DWP court case to add to a growing list of them – with each one serving as another exposé of its failings.

    Featured image via StevovoB – pixabay and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is challenging an independent media outlet over its request for the department to release “secret benefit deaths reviews“. To do this, the DWP is also taking on an independent government body. It’s little wonder the department is trying to suppress the reports and their recommendations. This is because they are likely to expose the DWP’s systemic failings and negligence towards benefit claimants.

    DWP: benefits death reviews

    As the Canary previously reported, for several years John Pring at Disability News Service (DNS) has been investigating DWP internal process reviews (IPRs). They are:

    local DWP investigations which take place when a claimant takes their own life. They also happen when a vulnerable claimant complains to the DWP.

    The department started them in 2012 – but it never publishes the results or the recommendations. As the Canary previously wrote, the DWP has:

    even admitted to destroying some of the reports. And while it has launched a Serious Case Review panel to monitor them, so far it has done little.

    So, Pring has been trying to force the DWP to release some of the IPRs since 2020, but with personal details redacted. He wants it to publish the recommendations made in the reviews. However, Pring has repeatedly hit a brick wall with the department.

    John Pring: forcing the department’s hand?

    As Pring wrote for DNS, he wants the DWP to release:

    secret reports completed between April 2019 and September 2020

    However, the department has repeatedly refused to release this info, ever since Pring first tried to obtain it in September 2020. He even took the case to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), which deals with public bodies like the DWP and what they do with things like freedom of information (FOI) requests. The ICO ruled in October 2022 that the DWP has to release the information. As Pring previously wrote, the ICO:

    found that DWP breached the Freedom of Information Act by blocking documents which would have showed recommendations made by its own civil servants to improve safety and reduce the number of suicides and other deaths.

    A catalogue of failings

    It’s not the first time Pring has taken on the DWP over its secret benefit death reviews. He challenged it back in 2016 over 49 reports it was refusing to release – and won. Then, he won again and again. As Pring wrote, the 2016 reports:

    showed that at least 13 reports had explicitly raised concerns about the way that “vulnerable” benefit claimants were being treated by DWP.

    Another review obtained by DNS, in 2018, helped show how DWP had been forced to soften the “threatening” tone of the agreement that universal credit claimants must sign to receive their benefits.

    And in December 2020, another freedom of information request allowed DNS to show that DWP staff had had to be repeatedly reminded what to do when claimants said they may take their own lives, following reviews into as many as six suicides.

    Those reviews suggested that a series of suicides between 2014 and 2019 were linked to the failure of DWP staff to follow basic rules that had been introduced in 2009.

    Predictably, the DWP refused to give Pring comment over his latest challenge to it. However, as the Canary previously reported, deaths documented in IPRs may just be the tip of the iceberg anyway:

    between 2011 and 2018 alone nearly 35,000 DWP claimants died. They died either waiting for the DWP to sort their claims or after it said they were well enough to work or start moving towards work. To put this into context, in one month during that time period, it would mean over 700 people could have died on the DWP’s watch. Also, in 2018 alone there were at least 750 (if not more) people who took their own lives…

    Pring says that a tribunal will hear the DWP’s appeal of the ICO decision later this year. Moreover, the news comes weeks after DNS revealed that the DWP had wasted £66m on a programme it created to reduce the number of benefit claimants taking their own lives. Clearly, the department is doing little to change the idea that it has something to hide over benefit claimants’ deaths.

    Featured image via Max Pixel and Wikimedia Commons/UK Government 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Salaries and hours of unpaid labor during the pandemic were on the minds of University of Illinois-Chicago (UIC) faculty who showed up to the picket lines on Monday for the first day of a campus-wide strike, but professors and lecturers are demanding more than just better pay. Like educators across the country, the UIC faculty union is also fighting for better mental health resources for their…

    Source

  • The Labour Party has revealed its plans for the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). However, the party’s claims around why it will shake up the DWP actually have little grounding in evidence.

    Labour and the DWP: “new thinking”?

    Labour’s shadow DWP secretary Jonathan Ashworth spoke about the party’s plans for the social security system on Tuesday 10 January. It was at the Centre for Social Justice (CSJ) thinktank – founded by former DWP boss and architect of Universal Credit Iain Duncan Smith. In short, much like his colleague Wes Streeting’s plans for the NHS, Ashworth thinks the DWP needs reform – but he also said it needs new “thinking”. His overall thrust is that, as he said:

    unemployment is never a price worth paying.

    Much of what Ashworth proposed is not in the context of unemployment but of people who are classed as “economically inactive” – either due to retirement or ill health. His idea is that these people need more support to get back to work. However, this narrative – that too many people are not working due to sickness, disability or old age – is exactly the same one that the Tory government is using. But do Tory and Labour plans differ? Labour’s press account tweeted some of the key points. First, it quoted Ashworth as saying:

    Being out of work is bad for health and the longer someone is out of work, the more difficult it becomes for them to return to a job.

    This was the first point that Ashworth had grounded in zero evidence.

    ‘Work is good for your health’

    Ashworth’s notion that “being out of work is bad for health” is exactly the same as successive Tory governments’ stance – an idea that was actually introduced by Tony Blair. They pushed the notion that work is a health outcome, despite little evidence to back up this claim. As sociologist and writer Sue Jones noted:

    Some people’s work is undoubtedly a source of wellbeing and provides a sense of purpose and security. That is not the same thing as being “good for health”.

    For a government to use data regarding opinion rather than empirical evidence to claim that work is “good” for health indicates a ruthless mercenary approach to fulfill their broader aim of dismantling social security and to uphold their ideological commitment to… [capitalist] policy.

    Jones further noted regarding politicians’ claim that work is good for your health:

    There is plenty of evidence that indicates government policy is not founded on empirical evidence, but rather, it is ideologically framed, and often founded on deceitful contrivance. A… [DWP] research document published back in 2011… said that if people believed that work was good for them, they were less likely to claim or stay on disability benefits.

    So a political decision was made that people should be “encouraged” to believe that work was “good” for their health. There is no empirical basis for the belief, and the purpose of encouraging it is simply to cut the numbers of disabled people claiming Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) by “helping” them into work.

    So, it seems Ashworth and Labour are set to continue this lie. Ashworth then continued aping Tory DWP policy further.

    Zero evidence base

    Ashworth said:

    Finally, the social security system should support – not hinder – people’s journeys to work.

    But too often the system disincentivises work, making even considering trying to engage in possible employment too much of a risk.

    He noted that the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) ‘traps’ sick and disabled people “out of the workplace”, because:

    Many people with ill health simply do not want to risk having to go through the whole benefits application and assessment process again if things go wrong.

    Once again, there is no evidence that sick and disabled people are not looking for work because the DWP disincentivises or traps them. On the contrary, the DWP has actively forced chronically ill, sick and disabled people back to work when it shouldn’t have done. One such trial of a back to work programme resulted in 37% of participants’ wellbeing actually getting worse. Moreover, the DWP’s aggressive policy of forcing people back to work has ultimately resulted in thousands of people dying. Ashworth is playing into this, as well as tabling co-working between the DWP and “local health services” (NHS) – again another flawed and dangerous policy. Ashworth framed this in the context of:

    we know there are hundreds of thousands of people currently out of work and economically inactive who may want to participate in employment with the right support… we owe it to them and their families to give them a fair chance to participate in decent employment.

    Again, there is no evidence for this.

    Labour: too many benefit scroungers

    Labour are clearly peddling the right-wing idea that there are chronically ill, sick and disabled people who should be working but aren’t – ‘benefit scroungers’, but without explicitly saying it. Ashworth gave the half-hearted caveat with his speech that:

    I want to be clear. For people who can’t work, they deserve security with inclusion not fear or threats. A Labour government will always guarantee that.

    This is not the reality of what Labour is saying, nor what would happen if they introduced the policies Ashworth has tabled. As Jones noted about the Tories, as capitalists they:

    see the state as a means to reshape social institutions and social relationships based on the model of a competitive market place. This requires a highly invasive power and mechanisms of persuasion, manifested in an authoritarian turn. Public interests are conflated with narrow economic outcomes. Public behaviours are politically micromanaged. Social groups that don’t conform to ideologically defined economic outcomes are politically stigmatised and outgrouped.

    … the merging of health and employment services and the recent absurd declaration that work is a clinical “health” outcome, are all carefully calculated strategies that serve as an ideological prop and add to the justification rhetoric regarding the intentional political process of dismantling publicly funded state provision, and the subsequent stealthy privatisation of Social Security and the National Health Service.

    While the language may be cuddlier, Ashworth’s plans are fundamentally no different. A Labour government with an agenda of wanting more chronically ill, sick and disabled people in work – when the Tories have already wrung that sponge dry, leaving thousands dead – is perverse in the extreme.

    Featured image via Sky News – YouTube and Wikimedia

    By Steve Topple

  • Claimants are lodging more official complaints about the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) than at any time in the past decade. That’s the headline figure from the independent government watchdog that deals with DWP complaints. However, this is not news, as the Canary previously reported that the figures were already up for 2022/23 – something the DWP denied to us at the time.

    DWP: complaints up again

    Claimants can complain about the DWP to the department itself. Alternatively, they can lodge a complaint with the Independent Case Examiner (ICE) – a separate government body from the DWP. As John Pring at Disability News Service (DNS) wrote:

    For a complaint to be examined by ICE it must be about DWP service failure and the claimant must have had a final response to their complaint from DWP within the last six months.

    As the Canary previously reported, complaints to the DWP and to the ICE were up in the period 1 April to 31 June 2022. We wrote that:

    Compared to the same period in 2021, these figures are a 29% rise in overall complaints and a 33% rise in the number of cases ICE is investigating. This represents 37% of all cases the DWP passed to ICE – the highest for this quarter since 2017.

    Now, as DNS also reported, the ICE has revealed that complaints to it in the previous year 2021/22 were at their highest levels since 2013/14. The verdict of the ICE’s boss was also critical of the DWP.

    Level of complaints not seen for a decade

    DNS noted that complaints were up in all areas – from working-age benefits to disability-related social security like Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The ICE itself noted a:

    17% increase in customers approaching the ICE office and the significant 68% increase in the number of complaints we accepted for our review.

    Joanna Wallace from the ICE said that:

    my office has not experienced referrals or intake at this level for at least the last decade

    Crucially, all this is with the number of people claiming some social security actually falling. For example, the number of households on Universal Credit fell in the year 2021/22 – while the number of complaints the ICE accepted about working-age benefits rose by 38%. Despite this, Wallace noted “more than half” of complaints to the ICE were about Universal Credit, and regarding the nature of the complaints:

    we found that confusion or a lack of knowledge on the part of staff resulted in customers making inappropriate claims in error in particular with the treatment of students and income they received from loans during the academic year.

    Meanwhile, the number of PIP claimants went up during this time, which may explain part of the 37% increase in the number of complaints about disability benefits the ICE accepted. However, this would not account for the entire increase. As Wallace noted, the majority of complaints to the ICE were about PIP, and:

    In the main the complaints my office received concern the PIP assessment process and how medical evidence provided to support a claim had been interpreted. However, my office has also seen complaints about payment delay, and misadvice.

    DWP says…

    The DWP did not respond to DNS‘s question about why it thought complaints were up. It did tell DNS that:

    We support millions of people each year so they get the help and service to which they are entitled.

    The vast majority of complaints are handled by DWP, with only a small proportion escalating to the Independent Case Examiner which provides an independent avenue for customers.

    However, Wallace concluded that:

    It is already a concern that cases with my office take far longer to be brought into investigation than I am happy with, and a sustained increase in cases coming to us such as we have seen this year, will only make that position worse.

    Given the figures the Canary previously analysed for the start of 2022/23, and the fact the DWP incorrectly claimed these were falling, it seems the level of complaints to the department will not be coming down anytime soon.

    Featured image via the Guardian – YouTube and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

  • It has been revealed that another Black man died during contact with the police – this time while experiencing severe psychological distress. The news will do nothing to dispel the idea that the police are institutionally racist across the country – given that it comes off the back of multiple police killings in 2022.

    Godrick Osei: another Black man dead

    As Nadine White reported for the Independent, Godrick Osei died “shortly after” an encounter with the police at a care home in Truro, Cornwall. As White wrote:

    Godrick Osei died on 3 July after police were called to a care home in Truro, Cornwall, where the 35-year-old was hiding in a cupboard in the early hours.

    The father of two had fled the flat he was sharing with his partner, experiencing a psychotic episode and expressing “paranoid thoughts”, his family said. Osei himself called the police while care home staff also rang 999.

    White reported that Godrick had a history of anxiety and depression and lived with addiction issues. Medical professionals also noted, just days before his killing, that he may have been living with a personality disorder. Still, it seems police treated Godrick as a suspected criminal when he called them. As White wrote:

    Up to seven officers from Devon and Cornwall Police arrived at about 2.30am and arrested Osei before paramedics were called at 2.49am. Osei died a short time afterwards.

    ‘He should not have died’

    Godrick’s sister Lewison Osei told White:

    Godrick meant no harm to anyone – he was a big, gentle giant; a caring guy who was always trying to do things for others, for his kids. In addition to his two children, he was a father figure to his girlfriend’s two-year-old daughter. That’s the kind of man he was.

    He needed help. Our brother should not have died that day.

    The Independent Office of Police Conduct (IOPC) is investigating Godrick’s death. Devon and Cornwall Police said their thoughts were with Godrick’s family, and they were supporting the officers involved. However, as White noted, the force has not suspended any of them.

    Institutional failings

    However, Jodie Anderson from Inquest noted to White that:

    The circumstances of Godrick’s death raise serious questions about police use of force, at a time of increased public scrutiny. It also once again highlights the issues surrounding police responses to mental health crisis.

    In 2020/21, 54 people apparently took their own lives after being arrested – higher than the previous year. As Mental Health Cop noted, within an IOPC report into this:

    Of the 54 supposed suicides after police custody, two thirds of those people (38 in total) had known mental health concerns and all suicides took place within two days of release, over half happened within one day of release.

    Then, the website Police Professional noted that:

    12 of the 19 people who died in or following police custody had mental health concerns, and 14 had links to drugs and/or alcohol, over half (48) of those who died following other police contact were reported to be intoxicated with drugs and/or alcohol at the time of the incident, or it featured heavily in their lifestyle; and more than two-thirds (62) were reported to have mental health concerns.

    Police Professional also said that:

    12 of the 19 people who died in or following police custody had been restrained by the police (11) or others (1) before their deaths.

    The point being, there are clear institutionalised issues with how the police deal with people who experience enduring psychological distress and/or are having a mental health crisis. So Godrick’s death is another in a long line of mental-health-linked deaths at the hands of the police – and all this is without factoring in ethnicity or race.

    Racism

    The IOPC report also said that two of the 19 people who died in or following police custody were Black – that’s 10.5%. The Black population in the UK is 3.4%, making the figure disproportionately higher. Also, as Police Professional wrote:

    Of the nine other contact deaths involving use of force, four of the deceased were white, three were black, and two were Asian.

    That’s 33.3% of the deaths being Black people – a severely disproportionate figure, as is the Asian one. Of course, this isn’t news to the families of Black people killed by the police – such as Chris Kaba, shot dead by police while not carrying a weapon. As the Canary previously wrote:

    The death of Chris is in many respects like the killings of Oladeji OmishoreMark DugganDalian AtkinsonTrevor SmithJoy Gardner and countless others, including when the victims were in contact with, or detained by, police. That is, the entrenched structural and institutional racism that pervades UK policing meant police killed them because they were Black and Brown people.

    Another avoidable death. How many more?

    Zita Holbourne, national chair of campaign group Black Activists Rising Against Cuts (BARAC) UK, told the Canary regarding Godrick’s death:

    This is yet another avoidable death of a Black man at the hands of the state. Mr Osei was experiencing mental ill health and as such his mental health team should have been involved by the police in ensuring that he was treated with the correct care and response he was entitled to. The police officers involved ought to be suspended pending a full investigation and held accountable for any failures and actions that led to or caused his death which they were responsible for.

    Mr Osei was having a mental health breakdown, he needed professional mental health support – not heavy handed police abusing their power.

    The fact that no lessons have been learned from past failures such as the death of Sean Rigg and the institutional racism which exists in policing means we can have no faith or trust in police to respond to Black people experiencing mental ill health.

    We send deepest condolences and offer our solidarity to Mr Osei’s family and loved ones and stand by them in their quest for answers justice and appropriate action.

    It is likely that the number of Black people, and those living with enduring psychological distress, who die at the hands of police will remain high in 2023. Until the proper defunding of this violent, racist, and institutionally prejudiced arm of the state is achieved, little will change.

    Featured image via Godrick Osei’s family 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A medical news website has revealed that NHS England has removed targets for the treatment of long Covid. This has rightly concerned many people living with the illness. However, there’s potentially more to this story than meets the eye.

    Ultimately, when other events are factored in, it seems that people with long Covid may end up at the sharp end of medical professionals psychologising their illness. They may also fall victim to successive governments’ obsession with forcing chronically ill and disabled people back to work. Moreover, this is worryingly reminiscent of the treatment of another group of patients with a similar illness – myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME).

    Long Covid: NHS England cutting targets

    Long Covid is a post-viral illness. The British Heart Foundation says it is:

    a term to describe the effects of Covid-19 that continue for weeks or months beyond the initial illness.

    It notes that the most commonly reported symptoms include:

    • fatigue (54%)
    • shortness of breath (31%)
    • loss of smell (23%)
    • muscle ache (22%).

    Long Covid is similar to the disease myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME). The onset of ME is often after a virus (like long Covid); a lot of the symptoms are similar in both illnesses and so far, there is not a full understanding of why some people get these diseases – nor no known cures for them, either.

    Now, leaked documents show the NHS’s plans for long Covid. As the Health Service Journal (HSJ) reported, NHS England has scrapped some targets for 2023-24 which were in place for 2022-23. HSJ said this included:

    a target to increase the number of patients referred to post-covid services, who are then seen within six weeks of their referral.

    Already failing patients

    In 2022-23, NHS England set its long Covid targets to:

    • increase the number of patients referred to post-COVID services and seen within six weeks of referral.
    • decrease the number of patients waiting longer than 15 weeks, to enable their timely placement on the appropriate management or rehabilitation pathway.

    NHS England also claimed it would spend £90m on this. However, as the Guardian reported in October 2022, England’s 90 post-Covid clinics were barely reaching the number of patients they needed to who were living with severe forms of the disease:

    More than 60,000 people in England had a first assessment for post-Covid syndrome in an NHS specialist service between July 2021 and August 2022.

    But the latest estimates released by the Office for National Statistics (ONS) [in October 2022] show that about 277,000 long Covid sufferers in England report that the disease has limited their day-to-day activities “a lot”. These are the people that experts would expect to be referred for an assessment; however, the numbers who have been seen are far lower.

    Moreover, the Guardian also noted that:

    An average of 4,000 people have attended one of these clinics each month between July 2021 and August 2022 for a first review of the symptoms. A third of them had to wait more than 15 weeks before that first review

    So, long Covid services were already failing countless patients – even with NHS England setting targets, albeit vague ones. Now, it seems the health body has abandoned, as one Twitter user said, any “pretense” of trying to improve care for this group of patients.

    Sadly predictable

    Rowland Manthorpe is a Sky News journalist who lives with long Covid. He tweeted regarding the HSJ story that:

    I have confirmed independently. A source tells me long covid is being “deprioritised” by the NHS

    For people living with ME, this is sadly familiar. The Canary has documented these patients’ struggles to get medical professionals to believe their illnesses are real and not psychological – let alone receive appropriate treatment. As we previously reported:

    funding for this chronic disease has been scant.. between 2007 and 2015, UK funding (including government-based) per patient, per year was just £4.40 – compared to £82.20 for multiple sclerosis. The government itself directly funded a mere £558,333 a year between 2012 and 2017 for ME research. Meanwhile, people with ME are disbelieved, stigmatised, given incorrect treatment, or told it’s ‘all in their heads’.

    However, there are more warning signs for long Covid patients than just NHS England’s approach to long Covid targets.

    Here we go again?

    At the same time as it’s deprioritising long Covid services, NHS England has appointed three new non-executive directors to its board, one of whom is psychiatrist Simon Wessely. Some people believe these two events are not unconnected. One Twitter user quote tweeted Manthorpe’s comment about long Covid targets while also noting NHS England’s appointment of Wessely:

    Wessely has advocated for using cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) and graded exercise therapy (GET) to treat people living with ME. He was also linked to the now-discredited research that claimed these treatments worked when they didn’t. Wessely also, in the past, lobbied the government to try and stop ME from being classed as a neurological, not psychiatric, illness. He did the same with Gulf War syndrome. The point being that he has a history of psychologising what are physical illnesses.

    It’s currently unclear what influence Wessely will have as a non-executive director of NHS England. However, his psychiatric approach to physical illness, coupled with his new job, may indicate the path the NHS is heading further down – and not just regarding long Covid. Already, part of the treatment for long Covid is psychiatric, specifically aiming to:

    reduce the psychological impact of the condition on the patient by increasing their understanding of the impact of psychosocial factors (eg interpersonal factors, emotional dysregulation, fixed or limiting beliefs)

    Limiting beliefs” essentially means that psychiatrists think chronically ill people’s state of mind regarding their illness stops them getting better. In the case of ME, this is not true – and could be the same for long Covid. However, Wessely has prevously pushed the idea that ME was based partly on “false illness beliefs“. Therefore, his appointment as an NHS non-executive director has concerned some people. There has already been evidence of medical professionals not believing people have long Covid – despite what NHS England guidelines state.

    Further to all this, something else ties into Wessely’s appointment and NHS England’s deprioritising of long Covid.

    Back to work

    NHS long Covid guidelines already have occupational health as a central part of treatment. They state:

    Occupational health support and vocational rehabilitation are a core component of rehabilitation to support individuals with long COVID to return to work sooner and remain in work. Employers need to make reasonable adjustments for people with long COVID to allow them to return to work safely.

    The potential with NHS England deprioritising long Covid treatment is that patients will end up with primary care practitioners offering CBT – which some trusts already do. Moreover, the cheaper version of this – called ‘behavioural activation‘, is already being trialled. As is the case with ME, CBT/talking therapies are cost-effective for the NHS, so it would be of little surprise if it pushed them for long Covid, too.

    Now, as the Canary has reported, the government is making a further drive to push chronically ill and disabled people back to work. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and NHS are, according to the Times, looking for:

    ways to incorporate “work incentives” into some mental health treatment, and looking at ways that those with low-level conditions who could work can be helped back into work via treatment.

    This is partly in response to 363,000 more chronically ill and disabled people being off work now than since before the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. As the Canary previously wrote, this could include people with long Covid.

    The end result?

    So, we have the NHS downgrading long Covid treatment and appointing a psychiatrist with a history of the psychologisation of neurological illness to a top job, and the DWP trying to get more chronically ill people back to work. It’s unlikely there’s a Machiavellian plan, direct from the government, to try and force people with long Covid into work by getting the NHS to deny them treatment. However, the situation shows how actors of the UK state view chronic illness: part-psychological, not that bad, and something that can be sorted by psychiatric treatment so these people can get back to work instead of costing the ‘hardworking taxpayer’ money in benefit payments. As one psychologist previously told the Canary:

    in recent years, policy has focused on returning as many patients to work as possible. This ‘back to work’ obsession places huge demand on patients to fulfil the neoliberal dream. One whereby health is linked to how much one can contribute to the public purse.

    It seems that people living with long Covid may be next in line for the ‘back to work’ treatment. Denied robust treatment by the NHS, their illnesses may be psychologised, and then the DWP would step in to “incentivise” them to stop being ill and get a job. If this seems far-fetched, it’s not without precedent. The clinical trial into CBT and exercise therapy for ME, now discredited but adopted by the NHS for nearly 15 years, was part-funded by the DWP – leading one MP to claim:

    One wonders why the DWP would fund such a trial, unless of course it was seen as a way of removing people on long-term benefits and reducing the welfare bill.

    Back in 2020, the Canary warned of long Covid patients eventually being treated like people living with ME. It seems that this might be rapidly becoming a reality.

    The Canary asked NHS England for comment. It had not responded at the time of publication.

    Featured image via NHS England – YouTube

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is making plans to effectively harass social security claimants during NHS treatments. It comes on top of pre-existing co-working between the department and the NHS. And it also shows that the Tories are still pursuing the ‘back to work’ ideology used by successive governments against chronically ill and disabled people – despite the potential harm.

    DWP: infecting the NHS

    The Times reported that the DWP is considering:

    ways to incorporate “work incentives” into some mental health treatment, and looking at ways that those with low-level conditions who could work can be helped back into work via treatment.

    DWP boss Mel Stride had already mentioned this. In his evidence to the work and pensions select committee in November 2022, Stride said:

    For those who are long-term sick, we have to work with the Health Department and employers and look at occupational health and very different approaches.

    Further to this, the Times noted that the department is considering:

    One possibility… that people referred for certain mental health treatments could be incentivised to go to a work coach afterwards, though this work is understood to be less advanced.

    In other words, if the NHS refers you for something like cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) for depression and you’re currently claiming sickness social security, a medical professional will push you to go and see a DWP work coach as part of your treatment.

    Co-working – nothing new

    This co-working between the NHS and the DWP isn’t new. As the Canary previously reported, the idea came from the last Labour government. However, it was the Tory-led government that properly rolled this co-working out in 2014. As the Canary wrote, it did this via:

    the Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) scheme. This is where the DWP co-works with the NHS, by putting Jobcentre staff into therapy settings.

    The government also extended this to so-called Individual Placement and Support (IPS) services, with the aims of:

    • Offering job finding advice.
    • Supporting patients’ job interview preparation.
    • Speaking to potential employers about a patient’s mental health.

    Theses services now exist in NHS trusts across England. However, people are critical of the NHS being anywhere near the DWP.

    Tories: ‘fulfilling the neoliberal dream’?

    Clinical psychologist Dr Jay Watts previously told the Canary:

    Mental health services are chronically underfunded. By ring-fencing new money for employment specialists, we reinforce the message work is the central goal of a meaningful life. This increases the shame, guilt and anxiety disabled people already feel. Even more so under a welfare system that equates worklessness with worthlessness. It is exacerbating mental health problems…

    However, in recent years, policy has focused on returning as many patients to work as possible. This ‘back to work’ obsession places huge demand on patients to fulfil the neoliberal dream. One whereby health is linked to how much one can contribute to the public purse. But this is foreclosing the reality of long-term disability… So we must refuse the insistence that work is a meaningful health outcome in mental health services. We must instead recommit to patient (not government) centred care.

    Now, it seems that the DWP and government want to further exacerbate the erosion of patient-centred care in the NHS. Overall, as the Canary previously wrote:

    ultimately, what we’re seeing is a systematic plan by the DWP and the NHS. They’re tag-teaming, trying to get claimants/patients off benefits and into work… the DWP and NHS are also co-working in other areas already; for example, trying to “coerce” GPs into saying that their sick and disabled patients are fit-for-work.

    NHS workers and trade unions should oppose any plans to further integrate the health service with the DWP – and social security claimants should approach this with caution.

    Feature image via the DWP – YouTube and the NHS – Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • By Talebula Kate in Suva

    Fiji’s new Minister for Women, Children and Poverty Alleviation, Lynda Tabuya, plans to use surveys and online platforms as an integral part of her ministry

    During her official welcome yesterday along with her assistant minister, Sashi Kiran, Tabuya said that over the years she had made it her life goal to help those less fortunate.

    She was happy that she could continue what she loved to do on a national stage in helping all Fijians.

    “As an integral part of my ministry, I plan on asking you — the citizens of Fiji — about the best way forward utilising surveys and online platforms,” Tabuya said.

    “One of the foundations for building a better Fiji is providing equal opportunities to all Fijians irrespective of age, gender, physical ability or income level.”

    To promote inclusivity and development, her ministry would continue to serve all Fijians through:

    • The care and protection of children
    • Greater policy intervention for older persons and persons with disability
    • More innovative and targeted income support to families living or caught in the cycle of poverty; and
    • Promoting gender equality and empowering women to reach their full potential.

    Tabuya looked forward to strengthening and building on good partnerships with organisations whose activities and outputs support the ministries strategic objectives and those who provide services in the area of child protection and safeguarding, older people, people with disability, gender equality, women’s empowerment and ending violence against women and girls.

    “During the turmoil of the last couple of months, the hymn ‘We Shall Overcome’ was often used as a source of inspiration,” she said.

    “At this juncture, Fiji faces daunting poverty levels and incidences of domestic violence, but despite all these challenges I believe with God’s help and everyone working together, we shall overcome.

    “I’m looking forward to working for the most disadvantaged in our society and together rebuilding Fiji into the way the world should be.”

    Talebula Kate is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

  •  

    Janine Jackson interviewed the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative’s Rebecca Vallas about the economics of disability for the December 16, 2022, episode of CounterSpin. This is a lightly edited transcript.

          CounterSpin221216Vallas.mp3

     

    Janine Jackson: Hey, have you heard about “Medicaid divorce”? It’s this trendy thing where people get divorced because it’s the only way to allow one partner to qualify for the Medicaid they need to live their lives, because if they’re married, they’re too rich.

    Kiplinger: How to Restructure Your Assets to Qualify for Medicaid

    Kiplinger (11/7/21)

    That’s a nightmare, not to mention in a country where some people get to forget how many houses they own. But corporate media’s response has seemed to be just a bunch of articles about how maybe you, as an individual, might potentially game the system, like Kiplinger‘s “How to Restructure Your Assets to Qualify for Medicaid.” 

    And then sort of, “well, would you look at that” pieces about the phenomenon, like Newsweek‘s “Internet Backs Wife’s Plan to Divorce Husband After Cancer Diagnosis.”

    There are, of course, many people who couldn’t conscience the idea that having a disability, or a partner with a disability, should mean choosing between your marriage and your healthcare. But they just haven’t given it much thought, or even known that it was happening—thanks, in part, to media coverage that suggests that only people with disabilities care about disability policy, just like only Black people care about racism, and only poor people care about poverty.

    It’s an inaccurate, inappropriate approach to core issues of the day that makes us seem more divided than we actually are, and makes change harder to bring about.

    So our next guest’s project is not so much about connecting issues of disability and the economy as illuminating how they have always been connected, even if those connections have been obscured.

    Rebecca Vallas is senior fellow and co-director of the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative, based out of the Century Foundation. She joins us now by phone from Virginia. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Rebecca Vallas.

    Rebecca Vallas: Janine, it’s always a pleasure to speak with you. I feel very strongly about the important role that this show plays in larger conversations, and it’s always, always fun to talk with you.

    JJ: Well, thank you.

    I was thinking about this project walking to work, and I overheard a woman, equal parts angry and tired, saying to a friend, “Why is Medicaid saying they’ll only pay for one hearing aid? He needs two.”

    And I just thought about the hours of this woman’s life. She was waiting outside a workplace, she was on her way to work, but this is obviously her other job—trying to get hearing aids for her husband or her child, I don’t know.

    But the point is, if you don’t have to be familiar with this system, then you aren’t, and you count yourself lucky. But disability is one community that anyone could be part of tomorrow. And so I will genuinely never understand the sort of general media disinterest.

    But into this void comes this project. And so I would like you to just talk about the need for it and, in part, just the informational gap that this project is looking to fill.

    Rebecca Vallas (photo: Center for American Progress)

    Rebecca Vallas: “Disability has been viewed as some kind of an afterthought…to larger conversation around public policy in this country.” (photo: Center for American Progress)

    RV: I appreciate that so much, Janine, and you’re so right that for an incredibly and often, to me at least, surprisingly long period of time, disability has been viewed as some kind of an afterthought to larger conversations, not just conversations that we have in the media, but also conversations that go on in Washington, DC, around public policy in this country.

    And, you know, I spend a lot of my time working on public policy, and trying to make it fairer for people who have historically been marginalized. And this project really is centered around that general need.

    And so backing up just a little bit, folks might be listening to this and thinking, “Well, didn’t we pass the Americans with Disabilities Act? Didn’t we solve disability problems in the US?”

    Well, yes, the ADA has been around for more than 32 years now. But more than 32 years after the ADA became law, people with disabilities in the United States still face poverty rates twice as high as our non-disabled peers. And that’s because of discrimination that remains widespread and, frankly, a litany of structural barriers to economic security and upward mobility that keep the American disability community stuck in a permanent recession.

    And while this is an economic crisis that long predates Covid-19, it’s also really important to acknowledge that the impact of the pandemic, which itself has been a mass disabling event, has really only made it clearer: We can no longer afford to ignore disabled people in our policymaking.

    And we at the Century Foundation actually did some polling on this issue. We partnered up with Data for Progress, a polling firm in Washington, DC, and New York, and earlier this year, we found that just three in ten disabled voters believe that leaders in Washington care about people with disabilities.

    And so, really, that’s where the idea of starting the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative came from. Here we are, living through a pandemic—which it doesn’t go without repeating, we’re still in the middle of a pandemic that has not ended. This is a pandemic that has spurred the largest influx of new entrants to the American disability community in modern history.

    And yet, we’re still in a place of needing to play 50-plus years of catch-up to make sure that we have public policies that work for disabled people, and, frankly, even public policies that contemplate disabled people.

    And you are doing such a great job in your setup of highlighting, from a human perspective, how public policies that don’t contemplate disabled people’s lives can end up landing when people with disabilities are either an afterthought or, frankly, understood as a “them” instead of as part of an “us.”

    And so that’s really the story behind the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative. The Century Foundation teamed up with our friends at the Ford Foundation and, in particular, my dear friend and sister Rebecca Cokley, who was the first-ever US disability rights program officer at any major foundation in the United States, we teamed up to bring together what are now more than 40 organizations.

    It’s a set of leading think tanks who have outsized power in shaping the economic policy conversations in the US, together with disability rights and justice groups, to work together, to learn from each other and, most importantly, to actually work to ensure that American economic policy conversations include a disability lens, and that’s really the through line, and the theory of change of this collaborative, is to say every issue is a disability issue.

    And it’s long past time that we understood, with one in four Americans living with disabilities, that this can’t continue to be a conversation that happens in July, once a year, when we acknowledge the unfinished business of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This needs to be an every day conversation that includes and centers the impact of the pandemic.

    But they understand that people with disabilities are part of the “us,” and need to be at the table in shaping the public policies that have an outsized influence in impacting our lives every single day.

    And so, yes, we see lots of media coverage trying to say, “Oh, look at the lifeboat”—which is a program like Social Security Disability Insurance, for example, or SSI—and let’s shine a spotlight on that, and try and say that people are wrong for seeking and claiming what are often life-saving and life-preserving benefits, when what we really need is a lot more attention paid to the doors that are closed in people’s faces because of their disabilities, that are the employment doors, that for many people, because millions of disabled people can and do work, that for many is the avenue that economic security and mobility would flow from.

    And so a story I would love to see as a headline in the Washington Post, how about some coverage about the fact that disabled workers were paid an average of 74 cents on the dollar in 2020, compared with non-disabled workers? Right?

    How about some coverage highlighting the fact that people with disabilities face three times the rates of food insecurity as non-disabled people?

    How about some coverage highlighting that roughly half of American adults who need to turn to homeless shelters to have a roof over their head have a disability?

    This is a picture that I really can’t describe in any other terms than saying the economy is not working for disabled people. And disabled people, we are the economy, we are part of the economy, and want to be contributors to the economy, both in the form of being workers and consumers.

    And that’s a flip of the narrative that possibly the Covid pandemic is creating an opportunity for us to make, given the broader awareness that people now have that the disability community is a community that any of us can join at any time.

    And with millions and millions of people now newly disabled by long Covid, I am hopeful that that is a shift in the conversation that we as a society are ready to start to make.

    JJ: All right, then. We’ve been speaking with Rebecca Vallas. She’s senior fellow and co-director of the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative. You can find that project’s work at TCF.org. Rebecca Vallas, thank you so much for joining us this week on CounterSpin.

    RV: Thanks so much, Janine, for shining a spotlight on the Collaborative’s work, and I really do appreciate your show.

    The post ‘Every Issue Is a Disability Issue’ appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  •  

          CounterSpin221216.mp3

     

    This week on CounterSpin: When the Keystone pipeline spilled hundreds of thousands of gallons of hard-to-clean, sludgy oil in Kansas, AP‘s headline explained that the disaster “raises questions” about the pipeline’s operation. The utterly predictable harms of fossil fuel companies are forever “raising questions” for elite media. What in the world would happen if they were seen as answering them, and calling for requisite response? We talk about the latest revelations about fossil fuel industry lying about climate change with Richard Wiles, president of the Center for Climate Integrity.

          CounterSpin221216Wiles.mp3

     

    Disability rights are workers' rights.

    Disability Economic Justice Collaborative (11/2/22)

    Also on the show: As powerful people call loudly for a “post-Covid” “return to normal,” many are demanding we acknowledge that not only are we not post-Covid, but that “normal” was not actually good for millions of us. Rebecca Vallas is senior fellow and co-director of the Disability Economic Justice Collaborative, based out of the Century Foundation. We talk with her about what that new project does, and why they need to do it.

          CounterSpin221216Valles.mp3

     

    The post Richard Wiles on Fossil Fuel Lies, Rebecca Vallas on Disability Economics appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on CounterSpin.

  • CONTENT WARNING: THIS ARTICLE CONTAINS REFERENCES TO SUICIDE 

    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has effectively admitted it has not made progress on a plan that was supposed to reduce the number of claimants taking their own lives. In the process, the department has also failed to account for the £66m it had assigned to the programme. Moreover, it is using the pandemic as an excuse – and only admitted to all of this because an independent media outlet forced it to.

    DWP: countless claimants taking their own lives

    For many years, countless claimants have taken their own lives on the DWP’s watch. It’s hard to put a number on the exact figure. However, for example, in 2018 alone there may have been 750 people who took their own lives while claiming from the DWP. The department is supposed to review these deaths using Internal Process Reviews (IPRs). However, across five years the DWP only carried out 69 of these.

    One such person who took their own life was Jodey Whiting. As the Canary previously reported:

    Jodey Whiting was a 42-year old mother. She took her own life after the DWP stopped her social security. Because the DWP stopped Whiting’s ESA, she also lost her Housing Benefit and Council Tax Reduction. Whiting lived with various health conditions and mental health issues. These included a brain cyst, curvature of the spine, and bipolar disorder. Whiting was taking 23 tablets a day for her illnesses and conditions.

    She took her own life on 21 February 2017, three days after the DWP made her last Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) payment. This was because she missed a Work Capability Assessment (WCA).

    Whiting’s case is not isolated. In 2019, the then-DWP boss Amber Rudd launched the DWP Excellence Plan. It was supposed to improve how the department operates, seeking to reduce the number of claimants taking their own lives. However, we now know that – over three years and £108m later – the DWP has barely done any work around this.

    Watering down a plan

    John Pring from Disability News Service (DNS) has been reporting on the DWP Excellence Plan. As he noted in October, under former boss Thérèse Coffey, the department took a:

    series of decisions… to weaken the plan, which was supposed to cut the number of claimant deaths, improve support for “the most vulnerable” and provide a “more compassionate” culture within the department.

    The plan aimed to help create an environment where DWP’s services were “safe” and assist in “avoiding harm” to benefit claimants “as they interact with our services”.

    But DNS has so far confirmed at least six ways in which the DWP Excellence Plan was watered down under Coffey’s leadership

    Now, DNS has reported the DWP’s Excellence Plan has effectively stalled. Pring submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) request to the department over the scheme. Pring wrote that:

    since February 2020, DWP has not produced a single report on progress made in delivering the plan.

    It has also failed to adopt any “critical success factors” (CSFs) that would have been used to measure progress, and it has failed to report to the Treasury on how the £66 million on supporting “vulnerable people” was spent in a way that maximised value for money, a “specific caveat” that was applied to the use of the funding.

    Somewhat predictably, in its response to Pring in the FOI, the DWP blamed the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. It said:

    It is worth highlighting, the reason we do not hold the information you are requesting, is because the Department’s activities and processes during this period were heavily impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic.

    Pring asked the DWP for comment. DNS reported that:

    A DWP spokesperson refused to comment on the FoI response this week or to say if the Excellence Plan had been abandoned and how the department justified that decision, other than referring to a statement given seven weeks ago for the report of Coffey watering down the plan.

    Anger

    DNS also reported that campaigners and people affected reacted angrily to the DWP’s lack of action on the plan. Whiting’s mother, Joy Dove, told Pring:

    It’s disgusting that they had all these things to make a better system and they seem to have abandoned it…

    Of course, we only know all this because of Pring. It is unlikely the DWP would have released any of this information of its own accord. That in itself is a damning indictment of the department’s callous, wilful disregard for claimants. But the very fact it was having to put in place measures because so many people were taking their own lives on its watch is the most horrific part of this story. No government department charged with the ‘welfare’ of chronically ill, disabled, and non-working people should have to take measures because so many people are killing themselves – because that should not be happening in a civilised society in the first place.

    Featured image via Wikimedia/UK Government

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • By Jan Kohout, RNZ Pacific journalist

    A new initiative has been launched in 15 Pacific Island countries to improve educational standards.

    The Pacific Regional Inclusive Education Review was launched last week with each country having their own national surveys with the assistance of community groups, NGOs and stakeholders.

    It has has been signed by Cook Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Fiji, Kiribati, Nauru, Niue, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Marshall Islands, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Tokelau, Tonga, Tuvalu and Vanuatu.

    The Pacific Disability Forum comprises one of the many networks used to complete the survey, and it has roots in 21 countries.

    Its main objective is to ensure children, including those living with disabilities, access quality learning.

    The Forum’s CEO, Setareki Macanawai, said the review allowed for an understanding of the current issues within education across the region.

    “[The purpose is] to have a shared understanding, and I think this is what this review has done. It has provided a lens-key, a good starting point. A good starting point condition for us in the Pacific to then develop a shared understanding of what inclusive education should look like for us in the Pacific.”

    Making education accessible
    Macanawai also said it was hard to make education accessible in the region due to various pre-conditions.

    “There is a lot of stigma, there is a lot of discrimination broadly and generally across the Pacific in the different cultures and societies which is a pre-condition that makes it hard to create an inclusive education for all, particularly those with impairments,” he said.

    Representatives meeting to discuss inclusive education in the region.
    The biggest challenge to inclusive education in the Pacific is limited access or children living in poor housing. Image: UNICEF Pacific/2022/Temakei/RNZ Pacific

    The review is conducted by UNICEF Pacific and the Pacific Regional Inclusive Education Taskforce.

    UNICEF Pacific’s Chief of Education Programme Anna Smeby said the biggest challenge to inclusive education in the Pacific is limited access or children living in poor housing.

    We know that challenges can be in physical access, teaching approaches and availability of extra support, and it can be in the inclusiveness of the environment which means the infrastructure, but also social and emotionally whether it is a welcoming environment,” she said.

    “Improving policy for inclusive education, building and strengthening to adapt and differentiate instruction, the resource in classroom so that they have the resources they need and improving school infrastructure, bringing inclusive education leaves us to learn from each other both the shared challenges and the promising practices.

    Vulnerable groups
    “Vulnerable groups include learners with a disability or some sort of impairment, commonly students in remote places who do not have access to full-cycle schooling and students who have missed earlier learning but also gifted and talented students that need additional support in different ways,” Smeby said.

    The collaboration between the 15 countries, regional partners, and the Pacific Inclusive Education Taskforce, supports Sustainable Development Goal 4 to achieve quality education for all and to build a pathway for all children to a productive and healthy adulthood.

    UNICEF Pacific’s Deputy Representative Roshni Basu said countries needed to include the review’s recommendations into its policies urgently.

    “UNICEF is committed to ensure that all children of our Pacific shores are able to enjoy their right to inclusive, and of course quality, education.

    I urge all countries to maximise effort and commitment to translate the review findings into concrete investments for inclusive education.”

    This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. 

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) was once again back in court on Wednesday 7 December. Chronically ill and disabled claimants brought an appeal involving the department’s failures during the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic. However, the bigger point here is that the DWP is back in court again – after years of countless legal challenges to it and its policies.

    DWP: back in court over the pandemic

    The Canary previously reported on this legal challenge to the DWP:

    During the pandemic, the DWP increased Universal Credit by £20-a-week. But it did not do the same for people on so-called legacy benefits. This included social security like Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

    We noted that:

    Several claimants brought a court case against the department over the issue. Represented by solicitors including Osbornes Law, the claimants argued that the DWP paying extra money to some people and not others was discriminatory – specifically against disabled people.

    In November 2021, a court looked at the claimants’ case – and dismissed it in favour of the DWP.

    However, the claimants weren’t having it – and brought an appeal to the Court of Appeal on 7 December.

    A court vigil

    If successful, the case could be worth up to £1,500 to every legacy benefit claimant. The court livestreamed the appeal, which you can watch by clicking through to YouTube here.

    Before the appeal, chronically ill, disabled, and non-working people, and their allies held a vigil outside the court:

    The activist known as Ben Claimant was there:

    He told the Big Issue:

    Since 2010 we have lost out through austerity, benefit freezes, increased conditionality and benefit sanctions. We’ve had our public services taken away and we’ve been demonised by politicians through the media. Not getting the £20 added insult to all those injuries. If we win this appeal then it will mean so much to millions of people. It would be a huge result for us.

    One of the claimants who brought the case against the DWP sent out an update out on social media:

    However, this appeal is not the first of its kind for the department.

    Second-class citizens

    Claimants have been forced to take the DWP to court numerous times in recent years. Invariably, these cases have seen people fighting for their basic rights. Paula Peters is an activist with campaign group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC). She has been to many DWP court cases over the years, and was at 7 December’s appeal:

    She told the Canary:

    I stood there feeling incredibly angry, exhausted, burnt out, that from 12 years of fighting the government and DWP to save our most basic human rights. There we were again to seek justice what we are rightfully entitled to, knowing deep inside we would be back there again at some point fighting once more. It’s deliberate by the DWP, to inflict the maximum distress, suffering and hardship and discriminate against us all.

    But despite the exhaustion, I had a renewed determination, that no matter what comes next, as disabled activists, we will continue to resist this pernicious government and fight back with everything we’ve got. That feeling was renewed amongst everyone at the vigil: that we will continue the fight for social justice, our human rights and continue to get the truth out there on the horrendous impact of austerity, the pandemic and the cost of living that’s claimed countless disabled peoples lives.

    The Canary has witnessed first hand in recent years chronically ill and disabled people, and non-working social security claimants, having to fight the DWP – the government department charged with allegedly supporting their welfare. It’s perverse that they have to battle the department for their fundamental rights in the first place. However, this is indicative of a system where their treatment as second-class citizens is entrenched – and 7 December’s appeal, simply by the fact it was needed in the first place, shows little will change any time soon.

    Featured image via Paula Peters

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The U.S. House of Representatives is expected to approve the Respect for Marriage Act — a bill already passed in the Senate to codify both interracial and same-gender marriage — on Dec. 8, 2022. President Joe Biden has said that he will sign the bill into federal law shortly after the upcoming House vote. This will protect the right to same-gender marriage, which is often referred to as same-sex…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • THIS ARTICLE WAS UPDATED AT 5:05PM ON MONDAY 5 DECEMBER TO REFLECT A STATEMENT FROM THE DWP, AND AT 6:30PM ON 5 DECEMBER TO REFLECT A SECOND STATEMENT FROM THE DWP

    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has had a system’s crash affecting Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claimants due to be paid today (Monday 5 December).

    PIP systems crash

    Journalist Martin Lewis picked up on people reporting that the DWP hadn’t paid their PIP. So, he ran a poll to try and get more info on this. It was inconclusive, with 5.6% of just over 5,600 people saying their PIP payment was late. However, people were tweeting at Lewis that they had experienced issues:

    Someone else reported that:

    Just been told by the call centre, that all the people that sort the payments thought they had fixed the issue Friday, they were unaware of this issue until this morning. You can hear the mayhem in the call centre, I was the 145 person the call handler has dealt with since 9am.

    They then said that the DWP had told them the crash was due to the £10 Christmas bonus payment:

    It’s a computer error, down to the extra 10 holiday payment, the 1st payment of that was due Friday, my P.I.P didn’t go in either, they are very aware of the problem causing it, and said they will pay everyone’s payment by the end of the day. I have a friend in DWP and confirmed.

    Other people said similar:

    And people were reporting that the DWP hadn’t paid their or their family members’ PIP:

    The Canary asked the DWP for comment. We wanted to know if the reports of a system crash were correct – and if so, why this had happened. A spokesperson told us:

    We are aware that some PIP claimants who were due a payment today have not received it. While this impacts a small proportion of PIP claimants, we are sorry for the disruption this will have caused.

    The issue is being urgently investigated and we are aiming to deliver the outstanding payments today.

    As of 6:15pm on 5 December, the DWP told the Canary that all outstanding payments had been issued. The Canary will keep you updated.

    Featured image via Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has said it will be paying claimants their £10 Christmas bonus soon. However, the amount is worth barely anything anymore. Moreover, with the cost of things like a Christmas dinner having skyrocketed, it seems like the DWP is taking the piss paying the Christmas bonus in the first place.

    The DWP Christmas bonus

    As Devon Live reported, the government launched the Christmas bonus in 1972 for social security claimants. Despite successive governments keeping it, the amount given hasn’t changed since 1972. It doesn’t take an economist to work out this is a farce. A quick input into the Bank of England’s inflation calculator shows that if governments had increased the Christmas bonus with inflation, it would now be worth at least £108. As This Is Money noted, back in 1972 the £10 Christmas bonus:

    was enough to cover the cost of a turkey dinner for the whole family, with change leftover for presents.

    In fact, it would probably have covered more than that – because, for example, the cost of a Christmas dinner was actually around £3.34 in 1972. Now, analysis from the Trades Union Congress (TUC) as well as the BBC shows that the £10 the DWP will be bunging to millions of claimants in the next few days won’t even get you a turkey.

    Like turkeys at Christmas

    TUC research shows that the cost of a Christmas dinner this year has gone up three times faster than wages have. It said in a press release:

    the cost of traditional Christmas dinner items such as turkey, pigs in blankets, carrots and roast potatoes has risen by on average 18 per cent over the past year, even faster than the consumer price index at 11.1 per cent, while wages have risen by just 5.7 per cent. The cost of cranberry sauce and bread sauce have risen by 33 per cent – six times faster than wages.

    If wages had gone up as much as the cost of a turkey this Christmas, the average worker would have an extra £76 a week in their pay packet.

    Meanwhile, the BBC did a breakdown of how much a basic Christmas dinner would cost at various supermarkets. It said that:

    A basic Christmas dinner for five people – comprising a frozen medium-sized turkey, stuffing balls, Brussels sprouts, roast potatoes, pork chipolatas, onion gravy and mince pies for dessert – will cost £30.03 compared to £24.67 last year.

    That’s a 22% increase on last year. If social security had gone up by that much, the state pension would now be £219.11 a week (£39.51 more), and a Universal Credit award for a couple aged over 25 would be £622.09 a month (£112.18 more).

    DWP: an insult to millions of us

    However, the real sting in the tail with the DWP’s miserly Christmas bonus is what it should be worth compared to 1972, taking into account the standard inflation increase.

    Back in 1972, the weekly state pension was just £6.75 – and it was pensioners that originally got the Christmas bonus. On that basis, if governments had kept the Christmas bonus rising in line with the rate of the full state pension (currently £185.15), it would now be £274.02. That £274 could pay for a family’s entire Christmas – albeit modestly.

    It feels like the government and DWP are mocking people with the £10 Christmas bonus. The department has cut some people’s social security by up to £13,000 across recent years. Meanwhile, the DWP’s 10.1% increase in rates from April 2023 won’t actually make up for its previous years of cuts.

    The department knows £10 is taking the piss – and that most people won’t even notice the money. Yet it continues to pay it anyway. The Christmas bonus is a cruel joke – and the only ones laughing are those at the DWP.

    Featured image via Pixabay and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is planning on forcing more chronically ill and disabled people back to work. That’s according to its new boss –  who seems to be ignoring the fact that there aren’t any jobs out there for them.

    DWP: too many sick people

    Mel Stride is the new work and pensions secretary – and he’s already making his plans for the DWP clear. As the Telegraph reported on Wednesday 30 November, Stride gave evidence to the work and pensions select committee. He was talking about how the DWP needed to get more people into work – with no mention of the fact that successive Tories have trashed the UK economy. Stride noted that the pension age would probably have to go up again – something much of the corporate media were quick to report on. But he also has chronically ill and disabled people in his sights.

    The Telegraph reported that:

    No 10 has become increasingly alarmed by the rise in the number of economically inactive people since the pandemic.

    Nine million people aged 16-64 now fall into this category. As the Canary previously reported, this figure has increased partly due to a rise in the number of chronically ill and disabled people. There could be a link between the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, long Covid, and the increase. This is because 363,000 more people are now off due to ill-health than before the pandemic. Regardless of this, the fact people are too sick or impaired to work clearly won’t stop Stride from trying to force them to.

    Torynomics

    The Telegraph said that:

    Stride is carrying out a review into how to get many of those [economically inactive] people back into the workforce amid record vacancies. He told the Commons work and pensions committee there was an “overarching case” for setting ambitious targets for doing so.

    It also noted that:

    Stride said his department used other targets, such as on getting more disabled people into work, which was “a very useful metric”.

    However, there are several problems with this – the first being the number of job vacancies, despite what the Telegraph claimed.

    The Office for National Statistics (ONS) said in November 2022 there were 1.225m job vacancies. The problem is, there are 1.264 million unemployed people (those who claim out of work social security). You don’t need to be an economist to work out that there aren’t enough jobs for all the unemployed people – let alone anyone else. Plus, the redundancy rate has started to rise again too. With the UK recession set to last into 2023, the number of job vacancies isn’t going to improve anytime soon. However, the fact that there are no jobs for chronically ill and disabled people probably won’t stop Stride, either. This is despite the evidence that his department making unwell people work just makes them more unwell – or worse.

    Forcing chronically ill and disabled people into work

    The DWP has a long history of forcing chronically ill and disabled people into work, and rarely successfully. For example, as the Canary previously reported, the Personalisation Pathways back to work programme trial in the 2010s was an abject failure – with the majority of people not getting a job or seeing their lives improve. The DWP’s use of sanctions against chronically ill and disabled people is another area where the department has faced criticism. As the Canary wrote in 2018, a report by think tank the Economic and Social Research Council stated:

    that “welfare conditionality did very little to move disabled people closer to the labour market”. It said the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) was seen as “uncaring” and “insensitive”, leading to “inappropriate outcomes” for disabled people. The report noted sanctions generally triggered “profoundly negative outcomes”, exacerbating physical and mental ill health. The report said compulsory work training (‘workfare’) was of “poor quality” and “limited use”.

    However, at its worst the DWP forcing sick and disabled people into work has led to deaths.

    DWP: blood on its hands

    Between December 2011 and February 2014, 90 people a month died after the DWP told them they were fit for work. Furthermore, between March 2014 and February 2017, 10 people a day died after the DWP put them in the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) Work Related Activity Group (WRAG). This meant it told them they were healthy enough to start moving towards work. The latest figures show that the department’s approach to chronically ill and disabled people hasn’t changed. As the Canary reported, the DWP is already putting more people in the Universal Credit group that’s the equivalent of the ESA WRAG.

    Stride’s plans to force more people into work are hardly new. However, what they do show is that the DWP has failed to learn any lessons over the past 15-odd years. This is probably because it institutionally doesn’t care. However, Stride’s comments should ring major alarm bells. The historical evidence shows that any attempt to force chronically ill and disabled people into work often ends in disaster. Any fresh push by the DWP to do this must be resisted – because few things have been more heinous in recent times than successive, capitalist governments’ drives to make people work when they really shouldn’t be.

    Featured image via Chris McAndrew – Wikimedia, resized to 770×403 under licence CC BY 3.0, and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is back in court next week. The case could see the department forced to pay millions of people over £1,500 each. However, the situation is not that straightforward, because this DWP case has been ongoing for over a year.

    DWP: uplift for some

    During the pandemic, the DWP increased Universal Credit by £20-a-week. But it did not do the same for people on so-called legacy benefits. This included social security like Employment and Support Allowance (ESA). Disability rights activist Paula Peters previously told The Canary:

    the Tories completely overlooked and ignored legacy benefit claimants during the pandemic. Many of these 2.2 million claimants are disabled people. Some were also shielding. Living costs rose and disabled people couldn’t afford the most basic standard of living…

    We just want to live with dignity and respect.

    However, the DWP has not gone unchallenged on the issue.

    There was discrimination, but ‘meh’

    Several claimants brought a court case against the department over the issue. Represented by solicitors including Osbornes Law, the claimants argued that the DWP paying extra money to some people and not others was discriminatory – specifically against disabled people.

    In November 2021, a court looked at the claimants’ case – and dismissed it in favour of the DWP. Osbornes Law wrote that:

    Whilst the Court accepted that there was discrimination towards disabled people on legacy benefits, the Judge ruled that the difference in treatment was justified. Mr Justice Swift (giving judgment in this case) accepted the justification put forward by the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (“SSWP”), that the increase to the standard allowance of UC [Universal Credit] was done with the intention of providing additional support to those people who lost their jobs as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and were forced to claim UC for the first time. Mr Justice Swift accepted that using the increase in UC to cushion the loss of employment or reduction in income was a legitimate objective.

    Of course, the DWP’s argument is slightly different from what the government said before. The then-chancellor Rishi Sunak told Martin Lewis in 2021 that the DWP’s:

    original rationale for doing the temporary uplift in Universal Credit [UC] was to help… people in work but on lower incomes, whose incomes were going to be affected by the [pandemic] crisis.

    So, which was it? Did the DWP uplift Universal Credit for people who’d lost their jobs, or people whose incomes reduced? Now, the claimants and their lawyers are appealing exactly this.

    Appealing the irrational

    As the Daily Record reported:

    One of the litigant’s involved in the challenge confirmed on social media that the legal team representing the four benefit claimants will present their case to the Court of Appeal on Wednesday December 7, 2022. The post, shared on Twitter, said: “I can now confirm that I have had word from legal counsel today that the hearing in the appeal of the #LegacyBenefits case will be held on 7th December 2022.”

    If the claimants’ appeal is successful, the DWP could have to pay around £1,500 in backdated money to people. Campaign group Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) said in a press release:

    There are in excess of 2.2 million people claiming legacy benefits, yet there has been no focus on their exclusion in the mainstream media, who instead have centred on Universal Credit claimants. This case was brought by claimants who were excluded from the £20 uplift and they are fighting for equal treatment for all legacy benefit claimants.

    Winning this appeal would mean that the DWP would have to pay the value of the uplift received by Universal Credit claimants to legacy claimants as well, and a lump sum payment, particularly during the costs crisis could provide vital financial relief for millions of disabled people in poverty.

    Whether or not the judge sees sense this time around remains to be seen. It should seem fairly clear cut to most people: the DWP treated workers differently to disabled people who cannot work – ergo, discrimination. However, in the world of the DWP and the UK legal system, that doesn’t mean anything. So, millions of people will await the outcome of this latest battle against the DWP.

    Featured image via Dan Perry – Flickr, resized to 770×403 under licence CC BY 2.0, and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • By:  Matthew P. Barker

    A local man struggling to survive on government assistance with deteriorating health is considering medical assistance in dying rather than face the uncertainty of homelessness.

    Medical assistance in dying or MAiD laws were introduced in 2016 with recent changes in March 2022 to permit people with disabilities or dealing with pain to access the procedure, even if they are not close to death.

    The change to the federal law “removes the requirement for a person’s natural death to be reasonably foreseeable” helping other people who want to access assisted suicide become eligible.

    Amir Farsoud, a St. Catharines resident, has medical conditions including degenerative disc disorder, spinal stenosis, spondylosis, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). He lives in constant pain which impacts his standard of living and quality of life.

    Even using strong pain medications there are days when Farsoud said he finds it difficult to move.

    “My best day is about a six to a six and a half, my worst day is about a nine, there’s days I can’t get out of bed,” he said referencing a pain scale.

    “I originally approached the topic saying when MAiD comes to be and if my life ever becomes nothing but pain management, then, I’m probably going to go that way.”

    On average he takes upwards of 20 pills per day to manage the pain along with three inhalers for his COPD.

    Farsoud said it took convincing to get his doctor to sign off on the first stage of the MAiD application, but now it’s a 90-day waiting period for his second assessment to see if he still qualifies for the procedure.

    “It took me awhile to get my doctor on board,” he said.

    “He knows physically I qualified, but he was quite hesitant because I told him the straw that broke the camel’s back, in this instance, was my impending homelessness.”

    The building in which Farsoud lives is being sold and he said there is no reasonable option for affordable housing.

    It is terrifying to think it comes down to housing or death, he said.

    “Death is something that petrifies me, and I was going to tough it out as long as I possibly could until we got to the landlord saying the place is up for sale,” he said.

    Farsoud doesn’t blame his landlord, as he has been the best landlord he has ever had and understands there is monetary issues involved in selling the apartment building, he said.

    Farsoud, who is on the Ontario Disability Support Program, said he would rather die on his own accord, than to be homeless and die on the streets, as prices of housing have well outpaced ODSP rates.

    A single person on ODSP receives about $1,169 per month or $14,028 per year, to pay for rent, food, medication, and a cellphone. This is far below the poverty line in Ontario, which is estimated to be $19,930, a difference of $5,902.

    Rent in St. Catharines for a single room vary wildly between $600 per month to more than $1,000, but Farsoud needs accessible accommodations due to mobility issues, which he says are almost non-existent.

    That could all change, if Bill C-22 passes into law and ODSP rates get increased closer to the poverty line so people could afford to pay rent, said Farsoud.

    For David Fancy, a Brock University professor and disability advocate, more needs to be done to help people who are accessing MAiD because of socioeconomic issues preventing them from living their lives.

    “I am fully in support of people making decisions about when their end of life is, I have no aversion to the legislation or the spirit behind it, which is to increase individual patient citizenship autonomy,” he said.

    Fancy points out the issue for him arises when it comes to several factors outside the medical aspect of the procedure impacting people’s ability to live fully.

    “My problem occurs when there are social circumstances resulting from lack of access to resources, care, and psychosocial supports that restrict individual’s autonomy,” he said.

    Fancy adds this leaves people feeling there are no other options than to apply to end their life, creating what he calls a Hunger Games style situation.

    “It’s like The Hunger Games because people are competing to try to stay alive and they’re being given an option to take themselves out,” he said.

    “It’s these dystopian circumstances for the people who have to make this choice.”

    He said it becomes a problem when its not actually a choice they want to make, rather something they must do to prevent suffering.

    “They would much prefer to be alive and there are simple social means such as housing or additional funding support that could reduce their suffering significantly to the point where they wouldn’t need to try to reduce their suffering by having their life taken for them,” he said.

    Fancy likens it more to a cliff than a slippery slope when there is evidence of the continued erosion of the social safety net including policies of disinvestment and socioeconomic supports coupled with new legislation on MAiD providing people with a way to “take themselves off the government’s payroll.”

    “We shouldn’t be making it harder for people to survive, while at the same time offering legally legitimate ways for having their life taken,” he said.

    “The choice is clear, we need, as a collective, as a society, to continue to invest in the social safety fabric, in a way, that provides support for people who are suffering from a range of overlapping reasons and provide them other ways of reducing suffering.”

    Fancy said other disability advocates have described it as political assistance in dying or PAiD.

    “The acronym PAiD really draws attention to the fact this is about money,” he said.

    “This is about disinvestment in the social safety net and it’s about a disregard of vulnerable persons.”

    According to the third annual report of Medical Assistance in Dying in Canada, in 2021 more than 10,000 MAiD provisions were reported in Canada, which accounted for about 3.3 per cent of deaths in the country.

    When it comes to MAiD laws for people who are going to lose their autonomy through dementia or other cognitive impairments, it was a long time coming said Pauli Gardner, professor of Public Health and Masters of Applied Gerontology Program in the Department of Health at Brock University.

    “One of the things they’re trying to balance is the tension between allowing people to make a choice about end of life as an individual decision and whether or not people are aware, of what’s involved in that decision making,” she said.

    “We can’t be paternalistic about levels of education and income as ‘you can’t make your own decision about things like this,’ so it’s incredibly complicated.”

    Farsoud said he is petrified of becoming homeless as he wouldn’t survive long on the streets in his current condition.

    “If I were to become homeless tomorrow, I’d be dead in a month anyway. The only difference between that and being dead from MAiD is I get to die in my bed with a health professional giving me an injection and me drifting off,” he said.

    “Or I can freeze to death on a subway grate in Toronto in a month and a half.”

    He said MAiD offers a semblance of dignity and pain relief in the final moments of life, something that being homeless wouldn’t allow him.

    Coming to this conclusion was not easy, said Farsoud

    “As much as death frightens me, homelessness frightens me a hell of a lot more,” he said.

    “I wish instead of MAiD, society would decide disabled people actually deserve to be able to have a dignified life.”

    This post was originally published on Basic Income Today.

  • The Office for National Statistics (ONS) has revealed that the number of people off sick due to chronic illness has exploded. The ONS doesn’t directly point a finger at the cause – but it does hint at it: coronavirus (Covid-19).

    Chronic illness: a sudden surge

    On Thursday 10 November, the ONS released data on the number of economically inactive people. This is how many working-age people are not working and not actively looking for work either. The ONS said that this number had been going up since 2019 due to long-term sickness:

    A graph showing an increase in the number of people economically inactive

    from around 2.0 million people in spring 2019, to about 2.5 million in summer 2022.

    But crucially, the ONS said that the number of chronically ill and disabled people who are economically inactive has shot up by 363,000 since the coronavirus pandemic began in early 2020. It noted that:

    Long-term sickness is an increasingly common reason for economic inactivity, making up 28% of all those out of the labour market in June to August 2022, compared with 25% at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

    The graph below shows the cumulative number of people ages 16-64 who are out of work because of long-term sickness, from  January to March 2017 to June to August 2022:

     

    As another ONS graph showed, more people were sick because of “other health problems and disabilities” and mental health issues than any other reason:

    A graph showing the different reasons people were economically inactive

    The ONS said that:

    Comparing Quarter 2 (April to June) in both 2019 and 2022, the number of people inactive because of long-term sickness who reported their main health condition as “other health problems or disabilities” rose by 97,000 (41%), the largest of any category.

    It noted that this could include long Covid, but that the disease may fall into other categories too. This is a concerning trend – but one which people were warning about.

    Long Covid: sadly predictable

    As the Canary reported in March 2020, before the first UK lockdown, the sudden appearance of long Covid was sadly predictable. Post-viral chronic illness has been reported for decades in the form of myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME, also known as chronic fatigue syndrome, CFS). People within the ME community were warning of the potential of an explosion in chronic illness – which has now happened.

    However, on top of this, the ONS reported increases in mental health issues. It also noted that some of the increases in long-term sickness could be due to increased NHS waiting times. But perhaps most worryingly, the biggest increase in this was seen in the 25-34 age group:

    A graph showing the number of economically inactive people by age group

    No end in sight for the chronic illness epidemic

    The ONS said that there were still more women economically inactive than there were men. However, it noted that there was a larger increase in men becoming chronically ill than women between 2019 and 2022.

    Overall, 19% of people who have become chronically ill between quarter one of 2021 and quarter two of 2022 were previously working. Within this, it was poor people who were hit hardest. Many of those now chronically ill were the lowest paid workers who the government forced to keep the country running during the pandemic:

    A graph showing the number of economically inactive people via lowest to highest paid job sectors

    For the rest of the new chronically ill people, before they became long-term sick:

    • 22% were previously looking after the family or home.
    • 21% were temporarily sick or injured before reporting long-term sickness.
    • 18% were retired
    • 12% were students.

    The ONS summed up by saying:

    There is a lot more to be understood about rising ill health in the UK working-age population, but it is not possible to assign trends in recent years wholly to one reason. With younger people seeing some of the largest relative increases, and some industries affected to a greater extent than others, it could be that a range of other factors, such as working environment, are also playing a role. Further work is required to consider a range of factors and the extent to which they are driving higher rates of economic inactivity.

    However, with coronavirus not really going anywhere and treatments for long Covid still not forthcoming in the UK’s NHS, this trend will likely continue, devastating the lives of those affected in the process.

    Featured image via Pöllö – Wikimedia, resized to 770×403 pixels under licence CC BY 3.0

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Canary can reveal that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will deny over 20,000 more chronically ill and disabled people November’s cost of living payments than it did in July. It comes as the DWP has already warned people not to expect the £324 immediately. Overall, around one million benefit claimants will not get the payment.

    DWP cost of living payments

    As the Liverpool Echo reported, the DWP will be issuing the second cost of living payments between 8-23 November. People claiming the following benefits should get it:

    • Universal Credit
    • Income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA)
    • Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
    • Income Support
    • Pension Credit

    If you claim Tax Credits, the DWP will only give it to you now if you also claim one of the benefits listed above. If you don’t, HMRC will pay you the £324 between November 23-30. However, like the first one in July, not everyone who claims social security will get the cost of living payments.

    1.5 million missed out who claim benefits

    As the Canary previously reported, the DWP did not give July’s £326 payment to a lot of claimants. This included:

    • 433,000 Housing Benefit claimants
    • 523,000 Carer’s Allowance claimants
    • 568,000 PIP/DLA claimants

    It was not possible to work out the number of non-income-based ESA/JSA claimants not entitled to the payment as the DWP doesn’t make the figures publicly available. So, overall, around 1.5 million social security claimants were not entitled to July’s cost of living payments.

    Now, the Canary has crunched the numbers again for PIP/DLA claimants, looking at November’s payment.

    Disabled people being penalised once more

    We’ve found that over 20,000 less chronically ill and disabled PIP/DLA claimants are entitled to the second cost of living payments. This is because the number of people claiming the two benefits only has gone up – from 568,889 to 590,435. These claimants won’t get the payments because they don’t claim any other benefit – like Universal Credit.

    Meanwhile, the number of Housing Benefit claimants who won’t be getting the cost of living payments has gone down – from 433,015 to 405,236. Now, this may mean that the DWP will give the payment to more people – but only if these people have moved to another qualifying benefit, again like Universal Credit. However, that is still over 400,000 people who the DWP says are poor enough to need support with rent – but not poor enough for anything else.

    DWP: beyond belief

    As the Canary previously reported, the DWP had not done an impact assessment at the time of rolling out July’s cost of living payments. This is where a government department checks how its policies will affect protected groups – like disabled people. However, in September the DWP did one for the cost of living payments. It stated that of all protected groups by law (like disabled people):

    There is no evidence to suggest any specific impacts on customers within any of these protected characteristic groups.

    This is likely demonstrably false, given there will be disabled people with high support needs that the DWP will not give the cost of living payments to. All this is without the 8.6 million chronically ill and disabled people who the DWP did not give the other, £150 cost of living payment to either.

    It is beyond belief that the DWP will be denying some chronically ill and disabled people additional support this winter. This will be along with countless Housing Benefit and Carer’s Allowance claimants, too. Inflation is out of control, hitting food and energy bills hard. So, it will be charities and communities who pick up the pieces of the DWP’s neglect.

    Featured image via Wikimedia

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Canary can reveal that the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) will deny over 20,000 more chronically ill and disabled people who claim benefits November’s cost of living payments. It comes as the DWP has already warned people not to expect the £324 immediately. Overall, around one million benefit claimants will not get the payment.

    DWP cost of living payments

    As the Liverpool Echo reported, the DWP will be issuing the second cost of living payments between 8-23 November. People claiming the following benefits should get it:

    • Universal Credit
    • Income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA)
    • Income-related Employment and Support Allowance (ESA)
    • Income Support
    • Pension Credit

    If you claim Tax Credits, the DWP will only give it to you now if you also claim one of the benefits listed above. If you don’t, HMRC will pay you the £324 between November 23-30. However, like the first one in July, not everyone who claims social security will get the cost of living payments.

    1.5 million missed out who claim benefits

    As the Canary previously reported, the DWP did not give July’s £326 payment to a lot of claimants. This included:

    • 433,000 Housing Benefit claimants
    • 523,000 Carer’s Allowance claimants
    • 568,000 PIP/DLA claimants

    It was not possible to work out the number of non-income-based ESA/JSA claimants not entitled to the payment as the DWP doesn’t make the figures publicly available. So, overall, around 1.5 million social security claimants were not be entitled to July’s cost of living payments.

    Now, the Canary has crunched the numbers again for PIP/DLA claimants, looking at November’s payment.

    Disabled people: penalised once more

    We’ve found that over 20,000 less chronically ill and disabled PIP/DLA are entitled to the second cost of living payments. This is because the number of people claiming just the two benefits only has gone up – from 568,889 to 590,435. These claimants won’t get the payments because they don’t claim any other benefit – like Universal Credit.

    Meanwhile, the number of Housing Benefit claimants who won’t be getting the cost of living payments has gone down – from 433,015 to 405,236. Now, this may mean that the DWP will give the payment to more people – but only if these people have moved to another qualifying benefit, again like Universal Credit. However, that is still over 400,000 people who the DWP says are poor enough to need support with rent – but not poor enough for anything else.

    Beyond belief for those who claim benefits

    As the Canary previously reported, the DWP had not done an impact assessment at the time of rolling out July’s cost of living payments. This is where a government department checks how its policies will affect protected groups – like disabled people. However, in September the DWP did one for the cost of living payments. It stated that of all protected groups by law (like disabled people):

    There is no evidence to suggest any specific impacts on customers within any of these protected characteristic groups.

    This is likely demonstrably false, given there will be disabled people with high support needs who the DWP is not giving the cost of living payments to. All this is without the 8.6 million chronically ill and disabled people who the DWP did not give the other, £150 cost of living payment to, either.

    It is beyond belief that the DWP will be denying some chronically ill and disabled people additional support this winter. This will be along with countless Housing Benefit and Carer’s Allowance claimants, too. Inflation is out of control, hitting food and energy bills hard. So, it will be charities and communities who pick up the pieces of the DWP’s neglect.

    Featured image via VideoBlogg Productions – the Canary and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • A protester captured a devastating photo at the People’s Assembly demo on Saturday 5 November. It’s one that should haunt the Tories. This is because it shows a disabled homeless person – as thousands marched against the government.

    Get the Tories out

    People’s Assembly staged its latest national demonstration on 5 November. Thousands of people turned out to call for a general election and to protest against the Tories:

    Former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn had hit the headlines during the week after he said he lived “rent free” in prime minister Rishi Sunak’s head. Corbyn also spoke at the People’s Assembly rally. He said that the Tories were sacrificing the UK:

    All on the altar of profits to distant hedge funds. That is the reality of what modern Britain is about.

    Disabled homeless people: the reality under the Tories

    Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC) member and activist Paula Peters also spoke at the People’s Assembly rally. And she took photos along the way. One of them was of a homeless person’s tent with a wheelchair next to it:

    The fact this homeless person is disabled is not uncommon. As charity Just Life wrote:

    A study by Crisis of 14,922 individuals, 70% of whom were homeless while the others were either at risk of homelessness or had a history of homelessness, found that 39% reported having a disability. Another study… found that 12% of a group of people experiencing homelessness showed strong signs of autism. The prevalence of autism in the general population is approximately 1%.

    This figure has risen in recent years. Crisis reported in 2019 that it found a 53% rise in:

    the number of people with physical ill health or disability whose local council have been unable to help prevent or relieve their homelessness under the Homelessness Reduction Act (HRA) and now are classed as priority need for housing

    Moreover, 45% of homeless people live with mental health issues. This figure rises to 80% for rough sleepers. Peters, whose photo is evocative of the situation, thinks she knows why all this is the case.

    ‘Barely surviving – or dying’

    Peters told the Canary:

    DPAC formed in 2010. Now, after 12 years of brutal coalition and Tory austerity, things have got progressively worse for disabled people. Successive governments have cut social security, Housing Benefit and the Local Housing Allowance; they’ve introduced the bedroom tax and chaotic Universal Credit; they’ve overseen rising inflation, energy and food prices, and presided over cuts to social care. Many disabled people are in energy and social care debt – chased by bailiffs for money they haven’t got.

    The travesty of this [is] disabled people are in a precarious position of barely surviving – or dying. If they can’t afford to live, they end up on the street. This shouldn’t be happening. More disabled people will end up this way. With the Tories’ budget in a few weeks, that’s sadly going to be the case.

    However, it’s not just the Tories causing disabled people’s precarity which Peters thinks is a problem. She noted that during the People’s Assembly march:

    What struck me was the sheer number of activists walking past this homeless, disabled person to get to the start of the demo. People didn’t see the sheer poverty literally beside them. They were too intent on getting to where they needed to go. It was like the entire march went through the homeless disabled persons space: people marching to resist this government against precarious situations such as this. It is so important to show the horrific situation disabled people are ending up in. I think some of the protesters on the People’s Assembly march chose not to see the homeless, disabled person – because deep down there is a stab of fear it could be them.

    It could be you, next

    It goes without saying that we all need to be fighting back against the Tories and the system. However, we particularly need to be allies for chronically ill, disabled and homeless people. As Peters said:

    DPAC are still campaigning and fighting the government. But disabled people’s campaigns need all the support we can get, to pile the pressure on the government to stop the attacks on us. We need to resist this government with everything we have but we need support to do this.

    As Peters summed up:

    No-one is immune from disability or losing their job. Circumstances change – and you can end up like this.

    Successive UK governments have systematically persecuted chronically ill and disabled people. It got to the point where the UN accused Tory-led governments of “grave” and “systematic” violations of disabled people’s human rights. That was in 2016. And in 2022, as Peters’ photo shows, little has changed.

    Featured image via Paula Peters

    By Steve Topple

  • Rishi Sunak seems to have forgotten about roughly 22% of the population – or at least his government has. So far, it has failed to appoint a minister for disabled people at the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) after the Tories made Sunak PM.

    However, this is hardly surprising given Liz Truss downgraded the role anyway. Of course, the role itself is pointless – because historically it has done nothing to improve the lives of disabled people. But this government not even considering it important enough to appoint someone to the role shows how little it thinks of disabled people.

    DWP: ministers come, ministers go

    At the DWP there are various ministers below the overall boss, who is now Mel Stride. One of them is the minister for disabled people. Five Tory MPs have had this job since 2016, including serial Tory leadership candidate Penny Mordaunt. Recent appointees for the minister for disabled people include Chloe Smith, who went on to be DWP secretary of state for just a matter of weeks.

    However, even the government website struggles to know who has actually been minister for disabled people. Currently, it says there have been four of them since 2016. Actually, there have been five. Claire Coutinho was the last one – before Sunak moved her to education:

    So who’s replacing her at the DWP? Well, it seems the Tories have forgotten to give someone the job.

    Internal DWP vacancies

    As James Moore wrote for the Independent, the DWP hasn’t officially announced Coutinho’s replacement yet. He noted that:

    Disabled people have their backs against a very hard wall. There’s the energy crisis; out of control food price inflation; and all the other stuff we have to shell out for that [non-disabled] people don’t even think about is also surging in price.

    However, the lack of a minister for disabled people isn’t the only problem. As Labour’s shadow minister Vicky Foxcroft noted in parliament back in October, Truss effectively downgraded the job – from a parliamentary under-secretary of state to its “junior” equivalent. Foxcroft said [0:08]:

    What message do we think that this sends to disabled people who already feel like an afterthought from this government, and will the government reverse this decision immediately?

    Coutinho, at the time, had to defend her own role – saying it was still an “important” job to the government:

    Minister for disabled people: abuse-enabler

    It’s hardly news that the Tories don’t give a shit about disabled people. After all, in 2016 the UN accused successive Tory-led governments of “grave” and “systematic” violations of disabled people’s human rights. More recently, on Boris Johnson’s watch 60% of coronavirus (Covid-19) deaths were disabled people. And the DWP’s assessment process for health-related social security is not, and has never been, fit for purpose – all while delivering real-terms cuts to people’s money at the same time.

    A Tory minister for disabled people made no difference to any of this. Moore wrote in the Independent that a minister in the role could lobby for disabled people. Historically, this has demonstrably not happened.

    Ministers for disabled people are little more than DWP and government mouthpieces. So, does it make any difference to disabled people not having one? Not really, because the minister for disabled people is little more than an enabler of state-sanctioned abuse – no matter who holds the position.

    Featured image via Maurice – Wikimedia, resized to 770×403 pixels under licence CC BY 2.0, and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The new boss of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has said when he’ll announce next April’s social security increases. However, he has given no indication of how much they’ll be going up – leaving millions of people in limbo.

    DWP: benefits increase review date revealed

    Mel Stride took over as DWP secretary when Rishi Sunak became PM. The previous Truss-led government said that social security may not go up by the rate of inflation in April 2023. This was after Sunak previously committed to this when he was chancellor.

    Usually, social security rises with the previous September’s rate of inflation. Next April, this would mean the DWP would put people’s money up by 10.1%. But Truss’s government said that might not happen. As the Canary previously reported, it hinted that the DWP may only match social security rises with wage increases, at just 5.4%. This would mean the department would be forcing a real-terms cut in income onto people.

    Even with Sunak now in charge, things are still unclear. The new DWP boss hasn’t made the situation any clearer either. On Monday 31 October, Stride was answering MPs’ questions in parliament. On increasing social security, at first, Stride said:

    I am currently conducting my statutory annual review of state pensions and benefit rates. The outcome of that review will be announced in due course.

    After another MP probed him, Stride went further – giving a date:

    That is a decision for me as Secretary of State, of course in conjunction with discussions with the Treasury, and those figures will be available at the time of the autumn statement on 17 November.

    Another MP asked the same question again, and Stride appeared to get ratty:

    I am afraid that, unfortunately, I need to refer my honourable friend to my previous reply.

    So, while claimants now have a date for a decision, they’re still none the wiser as to what that will be. This comes as the DWP has already been hammering social security claimants with cut after cut.

    Thankful for small DWP mercies?

    Thinktank the Resolution Foundation has already crunched the possible numbers. It said that if the DWP only increases social security in line with wages, it will be cutting £500 a year from some families’ money. This would come after years of cuts – including at least £10bn in real-terms this financial year alone. Stride has also failed to indicate whether he is reviewing the benefit cap. As the Canary previously reported, this is a restriction on how much money households can get in social security. The cap has already meant the DWP has cut around £13,000 from some families’ income since 2013.

    Stride giving a date for the social security increase review offers little to those reliant on the DWP. People will just have to hope that Sunak will force the DWP to increase rates with inflation. But even then, this will not make up for years of real-terms cuts. And it certainly won’t make our social security system any fairer or more compassionate.

    Featured image via ITV News – YouTube, Sky News – YouTube and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has been forcing more chronically ill and disabled people to prepare for work. This provision is taking place specifically under Universal Credit. However, we’ve only been able to see this after the DWP was forced to release the figures. This new data shows that the department is saving money. But, these figures also mean that the DWP may be denying countless people their full social security entitlement.

    The DWP WCA

    The Work Capability Assessment (WCA) is how the DWP decides if a claimant is too sick or disabled to work. Sometimes, it says that claimants currently cannot work. But the DWP still makes them do activities like attend work-focused interviews at the Jobcentre. This is because the department says they’ll be ready to work at some point. However, the WCA is extremely flawed: from the conduct of the private companies that run assessments to the deaths of claimants declared “fit for work” by WCAs.

    The DWP first started using WCAs for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), and has released figures on them since 2010. Under that benefit, the DWP puts people into two groups based on the WCA. The first is the Support Group, where it says people are too sick or disabled to work. The other group is Work-Related Activity Group (WRAG). This is where the DWP says people cannot currently work, but will be able to in the future. It also uses them for Universal Credit, placing people into two similar groups. However, the DWP has never released figures for the outcomes of WCAs on Universal Credit – until now.

    Finally releasing the figures

    As Disability News Service (DNS) reported, the DWP has finally released the information, but only from July 2021 to March 2022. DNS editor John Pring wrote that after the department said it would make the data public four years ago:

    The Office for Statistics Regulation told DWP earlier this year – following a complaint from [DNS] – that its failure to publish universal credit WCA statistics left “a gap in the information available” and that there was a “wealth of evidence around the need for transparency around Universal Credit WCA statistics”.

    Finally, the DWP released the Universal Credit WCA outcome figures on 11 October via a parliamentary question. As Pring noted, they showed:

    for every month… – apart from November 2021 – the proportion of claimants going through the [WCA] who were found fit for work, or were placed in the group of those expected to carry out work-related activity, was higher for those seeking support through universal credit… than for those receiving [ESA].

    Pring doesn’t commit to the reason for this. However, it is possible to.

    DWP: forcing more chronically ill and disabled people to prepare for work

    The Canary dug further into the data the DWP provided. It showed that the DWP found roughly the same percentage of people fit for work on Universal Credit and ESA. From July 2021 to March 2022, 20.19% of Universal Credit WCAs resulted in a ‘fit for work’ decision. This was compared to 21.45% on ESA. The percentages of those who the DWP says do not have to work are also similar on both benefits. The figures are 61.51% on Universal Credit and 64.69% on ESA – a difference of just over 3%. However, there was one area where the figures were very different.

    Under Universal Credit, the DWP is forcing more chronically ill and disabled people to ‘prepare’ for work – putting them in the Limited Capability for Work (LCW) group. This figure is 18.26% of all WCA outcomes – versus 13.83% on ESA in the equivalent WRAG. That’s a 32% increase in the number of people the DWP is saying can’t work at that time but should be getting ready to. This shows a major increase in the number of chronically ill and disabled people who the DWP is forcing to do activities such as interviews with work coaches, in order to get their social security entitlement.

    The increase correlates with a sharp rise in the number of economically inactive people. These are people who aren’t working or aren’t looking for work. This might partly be down to more chronically ill people. The rise in the DWP LCW group decisions also fits with an increase in Personal Independence Payment (PIP) claims. The point being that there might be more sick people now claiming social security. But the DWP says these people will have to work at some point.

    A money-saving DWP exercise?

    Of course, the end result of this is that the DWP also saves cash. The people it puts in the LCW group do not always get extra money. This is specifically if people are making new claims. If the DWP put them in the Limited Capability for Work and Work-Related Activity group, they would get £354.28 a month more. The department putting more people in the LCW group may also be linked to the introduction of over-the-phone WCAs in 2020. The DWP itself admitted that at first these phone assessments “resulted in a limited range of outcomes”, and it had to do second WCAs on people. This is probably because a phone assessment is no replacement for an in-person one. As such, the information the DWP can get about people is limited.

    The DWP leaving chronically ill and disabled people languishing in the LCW group is dire for those affected. It means less money, the stress of having to complete tasks to get paid, and the constant, looming threat of the DWP forcing them into work. These new figures from the department confirm that this is happening.

    Now, the DWP need to release the full figures for all WCA outcomes since it launched Universal Credit. We have to be able to properly scrutinise the department’s actions toward those it’s meant to support.

    Featured image via the Canary

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  •  

    Election Focus 2022

    After NBC‘s roundly criticized interview (10/11/22) of Democratic Senate candidate John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, journalists covering Fetterman’s race ought to have learned a thing or two about covering his disability. Fetterman, who experienced a stroke in May, was left with auditory-processing issues and some impact on his speaking fluency. Analyses of the televised debate (10/25/22) between Fetterman and his Republican opponent, TV doctor Mehmet Oz, proved that, for the election press corps, ableism is not so easily overcome, and style is always likely to trump substance.

    ‘Will only fuel questions’

    NBC's Dasha Burns interviews John Fetterman

    Introducing an interview that was conducted through closed captioning, NBC‘s Dasha Burns (10/11/22) expressed surprise that John Fetterman didn’t understand her as well without the captioning.

    When NBC‘s Dasha Burns interviewed Fetterman for his first national television one-on-one since the stroke, her emphasis was on his language-processing issues and his health, rather than on his policy positions. Because of his auditory-processing issues, Fetterman needs closed captioning to participate fully in a conversation. It’s not an issue of cognition; it’s a likely temporary disability—common among those recovering from strokes—that simply requires accommodation.

    But to introduce the interview on NBC Nightly News (10/11/22), Burns said, “In small talk before the interview without captioning, it wasn’t clear [Fetterman] was understanding our conversation.”

    Burns spent the first nine minutes of the 30-minute interview exclusively on Fetterman’s health and post-stroke symptoms, asking him repeatedly about whether he was fit for office and why he wouldn’t release his full medical records. She didn’t ask a single policy-related question until nearly 12 minutes in.

    Burns wasn’t the only journalist sowing doubts about Fetterman based on his disability. CBS‘s Ed O’Keefe (10/11/22) tweeted about Fetterman’s use of closed captioning for the interview, “Will Pennsylvanians be comfortable with someone representing them who had to conduct a TV interview this way?” The New York Times‘ Jonathan Martin (10/11/22) tweeted that it was a “rough clip” that “will only fuel questions about his health.”

    The next day, after coming under criticism from both the disability community and some fellow journalists, Burns issued a sort of clarification on NBC‘s Today (10/12/22):

    Stroke experts do say that this does not mean he has any cognitive impairment. Doesn’t mean his memory or his cognitive condition is impaired, and he didn’t fully recover from this. And once the closed captioning was on, he was able to fully understand my questions.

    As disability rights activists argue, if a disability doesn’t impact someone’s cognitive functioning or ability to do their job, then highlighting it only stokes prejudice. Some thoughtful pieces were published drawing attention to ableism in media (e.g.,  Buzzfeed, 10/12/22; New York Times, 10/13/22; Slate, 10/14/22) , which offered ample opportunity for some introspection among political reporters.

    ‘I almost feel sorry for him’

    CNN: Fetterman, Oz Trade Biting Attacks in Debate That Highlights Fetterman's Continued Stroke Recovery

    It was not the debate but CNN‘s panel (including former GOP Rep. Charlie Dent—10/25/22) that highlighted Fetterman’s recovery.

    Yet when Fetterman and Oz engaged in their only debate of the race just two weeks later, many journalists continued to present his disability as a source of doubt or weakness, and focused on that at the expense of policy differences.

    In one of the most cringe-worthy examples of post-debate punditry, CNN Tonight (10/25/22) spent its entire panel on the debate critiquing Fetterman’s performance and questioning his mental capacities, with virtually no discussion of the two candidates’ actual policy positions and how well they align with voters’ interests.

    Host Laura Coates framed “the” question about the debate as “how would [Fetterman] perform, given the stroke that he experienced back in May?” Her fellow panelists were ruthless in their assessment. Former GOP Rep. Charlie Dent said “somebody should have invoked the mercy rule” and ended the debate, claiming that Fetterman was “confused.” Later, Dent patronizingly commented, “I almost feel very sorry for him that, you know, he’s in a bad, bad way.”

    Former Trump communications strategist Alyssa Farrah Griffin “found it extremely hard to watch,” and said:

    I want to be careful because I think some of the most consequential leaders in history have had different kinds of disabilities. I don’t think it should preclude someone from serving, but what we saw today was someone who is not ready to be in office.

    She repeatedly suggested that his processing issues were actually cognitive issues: “Is the way that he’s struggling a result of this stroke? Or is it because he doesn’t have a grasp on the issues?” And:

    I was genuinely unclear if he understood how to address crime, how to address the economy and inflation. And then when he did try to lob attacks on Oz, they didn’t land. It didn’t seem like he had a full grasp.

    It’s not surprising that GOP panelists would parrot GOP talking points, but it’s the responsibility of actual journalists to rebut false aspersions, especially ones that promote stereotypes and prejudices. Instead, Coates kept playing more clips of Fetterman’s miscues, and CNN‘s Alisyn Camerota pointed out that she had interviewed Fetterman many times in past years and that he “sounded different before the stroke. I mean, in the interviews he was much more sort of clear-spoken than what I’m hearing now.” By highlighting the obvious—that after the stroke, Fetterman’s speech is impacted—Camerota made an issue of his disability.

    Symptoms in the spotlight

    Politico: Fetterman struggles during TV debate with Oz

    Politico (10/25/22) emphasized Fetterman’s “speech and hearing problems” in its framing of the debate.

    Many print publications also put Fetterman’s performance in the spotlight. Politico (10/25/22) went with the headline: “Fetterman Struggles During TV Debate With Oz,” followed by the subhead:

    The Democrat’s speech and hearing problems were evident during a contentious debate with the celebrity physician that addressed abortion, the minimum wage and fracking.

    The Washington Post (10/25/22) also put Fetterman’s post-stroke symptoms in its headline: “For Fetterman, Contentious Exchanges, Verbal Struggles in Debate With Oz.” Reporters Colby Itkowitz and Amanda Morris noted in their lead that Fetterman “often stumbled over his words and struggled with the rapid-fire format of questions and answers.”

    In their second paragraph, they continued the theme, writing that his “speech was halting, and he mispronounced words and tripped over phrases.” Questions of policy didn’t appear until the fifth paragraph, but they were subordinated throughout to repeated returns to Fetterman’s health and verbal missteps.

    At one point midway through, Itkowitz and Morris paraphrased a disability civic  engagement expert who argued that verbal “miscues should not be seen as a reflection on Fetterman’s ability to serve.” In the very next paragraph, they seemed to blithely dismiss her admonishment, writing that Fetterman “struggled over many of the lines” and printing one somewhat garbled response to a debate question as a gratuitous illustration of those struggles.

    Washington Post: For Fetterman, contentious exchanges, verbal struggles in debate with Oz

    The Washington Post (10/25/22) likewise made Fetterman’s medical condition the focus of its debate coverage.

    “His performance will test whether voters regard his impairments as temporary or even humanizing setbacks, or whether it fuels questions about his fitness for office,” wrote the New York TimesKatie Glueck and Trip Gabriel (10/25/22). Journalistic glosses like this imply it is really “voters,” and not elite media, whose concerns are at issue, and that questions about fitness are mysteriously “fueled,” rather than stoked by precisely this sort of coverage.

    Both the Post and the Times pointed out that Fetterman opened the debate by saying “Good night” instead of “Good evening.” Obviously both knew that offers no useful evidence about his fitness for office; publishing it reads more like childish taunting than serious reporting.

    Meanwhile, Oz, who during the primaries said abortion at any stage is “murder,” stated in the debate that abortion decisions should be made by women, their doctors—and “local political leaders.” He wouldn’t support raising Pennsylvania’s $7.25 per hour minimum wage. As the Philadelphia Inquirer (10/16/22) pointed out, he “opposes the expanded child tax credit, would repeal the Affordable Care Act and would vote against red flag gun-control laws.”

    All of these major positions are out of step with the majority of voters. And, of course, he has promised to kiss the ring and support Trump in 2024, posing a threat to representative democracy. But in the debate and in the followup coverage, journalists seemed to find questions of Fetterman’s fitness, based primarily on ableist notions, far more interesting.

    The post Framing Disability as Disqualification in Fetterman/Oz Debate appeared first on FAIR.

    This post was originally published on FAIR.

  • Content warning: this article contains discussion of people taking their own lives, which people may find distressing.

    The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) repeatedly breached the Equality Act in the case of a Universal Credit claimant. The department treated him so badly he needed emergency hospital treatment on three occasions because he was on the verge of taking his own life. But even now, after the DWP admitted liability in court, it is still arguing over how much compensation to pay the claimant.

    DWP: ignoring disabled people’s accessibility needs

    Disability News Service (DNS) reported on the case of George, who asked for his surname not to be used. You can read the full article here. As DNS reported, George lives with a neurological impairment which causes:

    regular seizures, memory problems and “brain fog”, and [he] has significant care needs, needing assistance with washing, dressing, eating, reading, writing, and completing paperwork.

    George made a claim to the DWP for Universal Credit in February 2020. However, staff immediately ignored his accessibility needs. They told him he could only claim online. This is not correct. You can claim Universal Credit via telephone. DWP staff also failed to put on his records that he was a vulnerable claimant. After this, according to DNS, staff “ignored or refused” George’s requests for support and reasonable adjustments. They continued to communicate with him online for a year – ignoring his requests for phone calls instead. But it gets worse.

    Discrimination and law-breaching

    As DNS reported, George:

    made repeated attempts to complain about the discriminatory way he was being treated

    But DWP staff failed to investigate many of these complaints. And on the same day they finally said George could get paper letters and phone calls, one staff member still put sent him an online letter and message. DNS noted that twice the DWP gave George a new case manager:

    who then refused to accept the reasonable adjustments that had previously been agreed.

    DWP: driving people to the brink

    The end result of this repeated unlawful treatment was that the DWP left George:

    needing hospital treatment three times for suicidal thoughts

    In court, the DWP admitted liability, but it is arguing over the £25,000 George is seeking in damages. Also, DNS wrote that that the DWP is still denying George “the reasonable adjustments he needs”, and is still asking him “to respond online”. You can read George’s full statement to DNS here. But he said:

    They have conceded my case, but that doesn’t change anything for other people. If they are admitting they did this to me, why aren’t they looking at the system as a whole? I think this is happening to potentially thousands of other disabled people.

    George is probably correct, given the DWP’s track record.

    Institutionalised discrimination

    The Canary and DNS have documented countless incidences of DWP discrimination, abuse and wilful negligence for many years. Nearly 35,000 people died in the 2010s on the DWP’s watch after it stopped their benefits, told them they were fit for work, or told them that they should be moving towards work. The UN accused the DWP and successive governments of “grave” and “systematic” violations of chronically ill and disabled people’s human rights.

    Yet here we are, in October 2022, and another shocking case of DWP discrimination has come to light. Its failings and intentional disregard for claimants are now institutionalised – only a government that will raze the DWP to the ground and start again will change this.

    Featured image via Stevovo B – pixabay and Wikimedia 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.

  • Chronically ill, disabled people have once more taken to protesting. They’re calling for funding for medical research into their disease, known as ME. It’s one that the state, medical professionals, and society have neglected for decades. So, ‘millions of missing people’ came together online and in person to demand change. And they were also asking for support from one specific organisation: the Wellcome Trust.

    ME: widely misunderstood

    Myalgic encephalomyelitis (ME) is a debilitating and poorly-treated chronic, systemic neuroimmune disease that affects every aspect of the patient and their loved one’s lives. For many, the worst part is a worsening of symptoms brought on by physical activities, mental activities, or both. This is called post-exertional malaise (PEM). The latest research says it affects at least 65 million people worldwide and around 250,000 people in the UK. However, the numbers could be underestimates. Some research puts the number of undiagnosed cases at 80%. Meanwhile, other studies show a prevalence rate in the population between 0.2% and 3.48%.

    Medical professionals generally claim there is no known cure. Some doctors have managed to get patients better. However, only around 6% of people with ME have remission from the disease. The cause of it is often clear – in up to 80% of cases, people get ME following a viral infection. It’s almost as if the virus never leaves them. Some studies have shown that people with ME have a constant, increased immune system response. It’s like the person’s body thinks it’s constantly fighting a virus which isn’t there.

    However, funding for this chronic disease has been scant. As the Canary previously reported, between 2007 and 2015, UK funding (including government-based) per patient, per year was just £4.40 – compared to £82.20 for multiple sclerosis. The government itself directly funded a mere £558,333 a year between 2012 and 2017 for ME research. Meanwhile, people with ME are disbelieved, stigmatised, given incorrect treatment, or told it’s ‘all in their heads’. So, one campaign group has once again challenged this chronic underfunding.

    Millions still missing after all these years

    ME Action UK held its latest ‘Millions Missing’ event on Parliament Square on Tuesday 18 October. The name ‘Millions Missing’ is significant. It references the millions of people living with ME who are effectively missing from life. This year, the focus was on research funding  – when in previous years it had been on raising awareness of the disease. Given that the campaign has severely chronically ill people at its heart, who are often house-or-bedbound, the physical turnout on the day was good

    Various guests spoke to the crowd of about 50 people, plus the online audience. Hayley Valentine-Howard is a midwife whose daughter lives with ME. She explained how it affects pregnancy, and its implications on delivery and the postnatal period – including the fact that there is hardly any research into this aspect of the disease.

    An image of the Millions Missing demo

    As one protester showed, ME can often affect whole families – hence the importance of genetic research.

    A person with a placard on his back at the Millions Missing protest

    Professor Douglas Kell is an academic from Liverpool University. He spoke about his microclot research and the links between ME and long Covid. Kell said:

    If you want to solve scientific and medical problems you need to invest in the necessary scientific and medical research. If adequate research funds had been invested in ME research in previous decades, as people with ME have asked for, we would have been in a much better position to help people with Long Covid. Funders really need to come forward now to help us find the causes of the various flavours of ME and consequently effective treatments for them.

    People at one point formed a red ribbon arc that linked everyone at the protest:

    People at a Millions Missing demo linking together with a red ribbon

    The point of this was to show that the ME community is connected and as one, despite geographical restrictions and so many members of it being house or bedbound. However, it needs far more support from those outside it.

    Wellcome Trust: people with ME need you

    Overall, the day was crucially centred around funding. Denise Spreag of ME Action said:

    We are asking all our supporters, people with ME and people with other complex chronic conditions to start this campaign by lobbying the Wellcome Trust, the biggest funder of medical research in the UK, to commit significant funding to ME. The Wellcome Trust have approximately £29 billion of funding available.

    Decode ME is currently performing a genetic study on ME. It needs 25,000 participants with the disease to take part, and is still looking for people. You can find out the details and apply here. Claire Tripp from Decode ME said:

    Doctors can’t tell you much about ME. They can’t tell you why you have it, why you can’t get better or even if you’ll ever recover. Without more research into ME we’ll never have the answers we need.

    The Canary asked the Wellcome Trust for comment. We specifically wanted to know if it would consider meeting with ME Action to discuss funding, whether it would consider funding ME research, and how such money could be made available. It had not responded at the time of publication.

    The real-world impact of ME

    The real-world impact of ME is perhaps the most heart-rending reason why so much more funding is needed. Maeve Boothby-O’Neill died of ME in 2021, aged just 27. There is currently an inquest into her death after alleged failings by medical professionals. Her mother, Sarah Boothby, spoke at the Millions Missing event. She said:

    My daughter died. The system does not work…. We have had four decades of very good political support. MPs who know about this situation fully support us. We don’t have a problem with the politics. We have a problem with the medical establishment.

    Boothby said that as a movement and individually, people with ME:

    For decades we’ve been asking for change. And why has it not come about?

    She continued, talking about Maeve:

    She was my only child. [Doctors said] there was nothing wrong with her – she was ‘too healthy to be treated’… I can see she’s dying. She knows she’s dying. How can that be? I want the medical establishment to answer that question.

    The protest was a quiet and lowkey affair, contrasted by a Just Stop Oil roadblock that was going on at the same time. But it’s results that matter – if ME Action can engage with the Wellcome Trust, and hopefully secure funding, then perhaps answers will eventually come for the millions of missing people and their loved ones before it’s too late for anyone else.

    Watch the full livestream of the UK Millions Missing event:

    Featured images and additional images via the Canary 

    By Steve Topple

    This post was originally published on Canary.