More than 2,300 died after fit for work assessment - DWP figures

Some 2,380 people have died after being found fit for work and losing benefits, Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) figures show.
Between December 2011 and February 2014 the equivalent of about 90 people a month died after their Employment and Support Allowance claim was ended.
Campaigners have called for the "tragic" figures to be investigated.
The DWP said no link could be assumed between the deaths and claimants being deemed fit for work.

'Tragic'

The figures - and the time frame they cover - were released after the Information Commissioner ruled the government should release the statistics, including mortality rates for benefit claimants, in response to Freedom of Information (FOI) requests.

The data does not contain a breakdown of how the people died.
The 2,380 people who died had received Work Capability Assessments (WCA) to decide if they were eligible to receive ESA, which replaced incapacity benefit, income support and severe disablement allowance in 2008.
Of the 2,380, 1,340 died after appealing against their decisions, though it is not known what proportion of those appeals were successful or failed.
Learning disability charity Mencap said the numbers appeared unusually high for people of working age who had so recently been declared fit.
The charity's Rob Holland, who co-chairs the Disability Benefits Consortium, a consortium of charities and other bodies, said: "These tragic figures are concerning and warrant further investigation.
"We know the fit for work test is failing disabled people, with devastating consequences."
The figures said 2,017,070 people were given a decision following their WCA between May 2010 and February 2013, with 40,680 dying within a year of that decision.
But the data showed a decline in the mortality rate of all benefit claimants - the number of deaths per 100,000 people - from 822 to 723 between 2003 and 2013.
This was slower, proportionally, than the decline in the mortality rate of the general population, which fell from 305 to 240 in the same period, according to the statistics.

'Shocking figures'

Mike Sivier, a campaigner who made one of the FOI requests, said: "I am glad that the figures have come out.
"The whole point of making an FOI request was to raise questions. It is important to keep asking questions."
Labour leadership candidate and shadow health secretary Andy Burnham said they were "shocking figures" and called for an "urgent national debate" about the statistics.
The DWP said it had always intended to release the information but only "once they had met the high standards expected of official statistics".
It said it did not hold the information on the reason for the deaths which meant no link could be drawn between the WCA decision and the number of people who died.
A DWP spokesman said: "The mortality rate for people who have died while claiming an out-of-work benefit has fallen over a 10-year period. This is in line with the mortality rate for the general working-age population.
"The government continues to support millions of people on benefits with an £80bn working-age welfare safety net in place."

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Learning disability charity Mencap said the numbers appeared unusually high for people of working age who had so recently been declared fit.
The charity's Rob Holland, who co-chairs the Disability Benefits Consortium, a consortium of charities and other bodies, said: "These tragic figures are concerning and warrant further investigation.
"We know the fit for work test is failing disabled people, with devastating consequences."
The figures said 2,017,070 people were given a decision following their WCA between May 2010 and February 2013, with 40,680 dying within a year of that decision.
But the data showed a decline in the mortality rate of all benefit claimants - the number of deaths per 100,000 people - from 822 to 723 between 2003 and 2013.
This was slower, proportionally, than the decline in the mortality rate of the general population, which fell from 305 to 240 in the same period, according to the statistics.
unquote

This looks like massaging the figures for some or other purpose. I'm rather inclined to think that it is healthier for people to do some work than none at all. Over 2 million of disabled in a population of 70 million is a high percentage imo. I am sure there are many who need it, but I have extensive personal experience of people who were subsidised for some or other disability (two re mental health) whose only problem was that they didn't like to work.
I also had personal experience of the interest of charities such as MIND and Mencap to keep the disabled dependent on them and the state. It's almost an industry. Have any of these charities a record of people they've helped back wholly or partly  to have  an independent life-style?  I'd like to see those figures.

Hi Tigger, thank you for the article,take a bow Duncan and Esther proud of your achievements now?
Isn't it remarkable,dodgy Dave can fill the house of Lords with his cronies to out vote the chambers work, care of the tax payer,£300 per day plus lavish meals, yet if you were on ESA £72-112 per week to exist on,your weeded out as fit for work by the wonderful ATOS private firm conducting the examinations,eh Duncan, the quiet man of the Conservative party?
So the tax payer subsidise Dodgy Daves abuses of the process of the House of Commons and nothing illegal has been done, we are told, no payments for titles eh Dave,cleaning of moats,duck ponds, fraudulent expenses claims disappear from history? 
Now we have the wonderful William Hague made a lord,pity he will not be able to sit on Lord GJ lap?
Whoooshed out of Parliament very quick eh Dodgy Dave,remember his remarkable inquiry into Bryn Alyn / Estyn where no perpetrators were uncovered of child abuse, eh William,rewarded for services rendered,time to sit back and rest on his laurels after his shiney **se has just left the Commons!?

willowthewisp wrote:Hi Tigger, thank you for the article,take a bow Duncan and Esther proud of your achievements now?
Isn't it remarkable,dodgy Dave can fill the house of Lords with his cronies to out vote the chambers work, care of the tax payer,£300 per day plus lavish meals, yet if you were on ESA £72-112 per week to exist on,your weeded out as fit for work by the wonderful ATOS private firm conducting the examinations,eh Duncan, the quiet man of the Conservative party?
So the tax payer subsidise Dodgy Daves abuses of the process of the House of Commons and nothing illegal has been done, we are told, no payments for titles eh Dave,cleaning of moats,duck ponds, fraudulent expenses claims disappear from history? 
Now we have the wonderful William Hague made a lord,pity he will not be able to sit on Lord GJ lap?
Whoooshed out of Parliament very quick eh Dodgy Dave,remember his remarkable inquiry into Bryn Alyn / Estyn where no perpetrators were uncovered of child abuse, eh William,rewarded for services rendered,time to sit back and rest on his laurels after his shiney **se has just left the Commons!?

Willow, you beat me to it. How repugnant that some octogenarian can shuffle into the HoL with his/her drip still in situ, be there for 15 minutes (clock in and clock out, for the great unwashed) and claim £300. I few months ago I happened to be at one of these "medical assessments" with a person, and while sitting there, a young man came in with his mother. The young man was blind, and it was obvious he was blind, yet he was in fear of losing his benefit. What the hell was the young man called to an assessment for in the first place????

I am all for getting the lead-swingers off benefits and back to work, but there needs to be a balance between the sick, the lame and the lazy. At the moment everyone is being treated like cattle. And to think that IDS couldn't hack it when he was asked to live on £70? per week for a WEEK? The "quiet man" is the lowest of the low.

But back to the £300 per day payment to the "respectful" Lords etc. I don't care if they pay themselves £5000 per day, BUT WHEN IT IS COMING OUT OF MY TAXES, I will shout it from the rooftops. Do what you like, BUT NOT WITH MY MONEY. My hubby paid 40% of his private pension in taxes. It sickens me to think that his investments are going to those coffin dodgers in Parliament.

Rant over!

Hi Sallypelt, thank you for your post,
It really is amazing how they can abuse the process to their own refinements, I know we are told it is just a few rotten eggs consistently and not all MP's abuse the working of Parliaments rules,yet they refuse to divulge to the public of their remuneration package,Why?

Re  the blind young man coming in for assessment. Obviously they all have to come in for assessment or visited if not mobile but in my experience these are done by very average to low intelligence civil servants, or  whoever.
The blind boy - wouldn't it be nice if he could train to do a job where listening is of the essence?  Society tends to send  disabled people to a dead end where they are declared useless to society.
My neighbour is a music teacher, she lost a leg and most of a hip to cancer, aged 40 now. She could have chosen to have full disability pay out, but chose to keep on teaching. So the council pays for her cleaning lady and a few other 'perks' and otherwise she looks after herself.
Labour bought votes by  means of giving people money for doing nothing. Family credit etc.  As for the House of Lords, Labour did even better, if you paid someone in the party  enough you'd become a Lord in no time.
Seems people have short memories. New Labour has never liked 'the people'  - Blair was the worst thing that happened to the UK since WWI imo. We're still coping with the fall-out of his reign.
I may be wrong but iirc it was Labour who re-designed the House of Lords so that they could get their cronies in, many of whom appear to have paid for the privilege.

tigger wrote:The blind boy - wouldn't it be nice if he could train to do a job where listening is of the essence?

Yes.. but they don't want to spend money training.

Shelf stacking and other below living wage crap jobs don't require much or any training.

They are not really interested in what is best for the individual.

This is all about maximizing profits for business with tax-payer subsidized labor.

Roll on the social revolution - because people will be pushed over the edge eventually.