This Writer is willing to bet the answer is “yes”.
The research clearly shows that the Work Capability Assessment is unfit to be used as any indicator of a person’s health. We all knew that already but this evidence proves it.
If the test was accurate, then areas with lower disability and ill health would find more people fit for work. Instead, we’re seeing the opposite – areas where people have the most need for ESA, with higher poverty and higher disability, are removing it at a higher rate.
And here’s something very interesting: The research has established a significant relationship between work capability assessment outcomes and local educational attainment. In areas where children finish school with more GCSEs, claimants were placed into the support group more frequently.
Doesn’t this suggest that people with the awareness to realise the test is rigged – and who can then take action to counteract its prejudice – are better-equipped to succeed in a claim than those who have to trust in the government’s claims that it is fair?
The research suggests that the test was designed from the outset to cut support for sick and disabled people, rather than target it to those who need it the most.
But we all knew that already, didn’t we?
It is only a few months since This Writer was present at a tribunal in which the claimant was allowed into the Support Group of ESA after saying the assessment system had induced her to consider taking her own life.
Now, I can’t say that this was the reason the benefit was granted, but the fear of such a death – and the publicity it would generate, were it made clear that the assessment process itself had caused the claimant to consider it – must be huge, if the basis of the assessment isn’t rock-solid medical evidence.
And we know it isn’t.
The basis of the assessment is a tick-box, multiple-choice test that relies on the opinion of assessors who often know little about the illness they are testing, and discounts the medical evidence of the claimant’s doctors.
Its base-level presumption is that the illness causing the claimant to request state benefit is all in their mind, or that they are trying to claim fraudulently.
This evidence will fuel claims that the imposition of ESA, PIP and the Work Capability Assessment has led to premature deaths.
But the DWP has already discounted it – supporting its assertion with… well, nothing, really.
It’s typical of the lazy attitude nurtured in that government department since Iain Duncan Smith took over in 2010, and by both secretaries of state since.
“Fit for work” tests are “significantly biased” against claimants in poor areas of the country, new research shows.
Analysis of more than a million incapacity benefit claimants who have been re-assessed for employment and support allowance (ESA), the benefit for people too disabled or ill to work, shows the controversial work capability assessment is disproportionately removing benefits from people in more deprived regions.
At the same time, it found claimants in wealthier areas are more likely not only to retain their sickness benefits – and avoid being declared fit for work – but to be placed in the support group of ESA, in which claimants are not required to undertake any form of work preparation and receive the highest benefit rate.
Join the Vox Political Facebook page.
If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!
Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
(but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:
Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.
Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:
The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here: