ACCforum: dr David Beaumont - ACCforum

Jump to content

  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

dr David Beaumont

#21 User is offline   jax 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3
  • Joined: 16-June 10

Posted 28 June 2012 - 10:37 PM

View Postjax, on 27 June 2012 - 07:25 PM, said:

I did see Dr Martin Robb as I complained about Beaumont and Yarnell and told ACC I would never see them again!! I found Dr Robb far easier to talk to and he was understanding re my circumstances and he found that I was entitled to be on ACC and my weekly comp was reinstalled. Thankfully there are still doctors out there that still care and listen!!!!!

Oh....... and if you check Dr Martin Robb on the ACC forum...... it will tell you that he had a massive head injury due to drink drivin
g and hitting a bridge............. I bloody challenged him on this and he told me that it was a ski accident and he was in a coma for
about 4 days ........ he actually has proof on hand for anyone who questions him. He told me that he can't be bothered with the lies but if anyone
asks then he has proof............
he was the only Doc that listened to me and I have now had my weekly comp reinstated.
Thanks Dr robb

\
0

#22 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 02 August 2012 - 09:35 PM

Atos Victims Group News telling it like it is online forum.

Maybe someone would like to email them & encourage there members to join & participate in
http://www.accforum.org

Knowledge is power & the internet is for sharing & learning from each other with first hand experiences.


http://atosvictimsgroup.co.uk/

View Postfairgo, on 11 March 2012 - 10:08 AM, said:

He came from the UK in 2006 - prior to that he worked as an occupational physician for ATOS origin healthcare. The very same company that was put under the spotlight by the UK parliament in 2010 and 2011. The comments below were sent to me yesterday by one of our contacts, makes for interesting reading. Both the Harrington reports are on the net as is "The role of incapacity reassessments in helping claimants into employment"

**************************

Apparently Atos Healthcare advised the UK's Health and Safety Executive that "The Medical Examination Centre assesses people's functional ability through consultation, discussion and simple physical tests (e.g. reflex) ..." - sound familiar?! The complaints about Atos assessments also sound disturbingly familiar in the ACC context, e.g. "Too often evidence from the Atos Origin doctor is preferred over other evidence supplied by practitioners who are more familiar with the applicant's condition". The Work and Pensions Committee of the British Parliament held an inquiry into Atos and produced a 182 page report in July 2011, "The role of incapacity benefit reassessments in helping claimants into employment" (HC1015)(Sixth Report of Session 2010-2012). The Committee commented, "decision-makers rarely question the advice provided by Atos" (p 31) and "they tended to 'rubber stamp' the advice received from Atos" (p 42). Again, sound familiar?! The Committee reached the view: "The service provided by Atos Healthcare, which carries out the [work capability assessment], has often fallen below the standard claimants rightly expect". This is the company with which Dr Beaumont was associated before he came to New Zealand in 2006. He appears to have set up in New Zealand a very similar operation to that of Atos Origin Healthcare in the UK. Looking at his activities objectively, one could say that he has created a perceived need in NZ and then set out to provide services to meet that created need.

0

#23 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 03 August 2012 - 05:54 PM

http://www.healthywo...tters/news7.pdf

Occupational Health, Confidentiality and the Law
0

#24 User is offline   hukildaspida 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Member
  • Posts: 3353
  • Joined: 24-August 07

Posted 20 December 2013 - 04:43 PM


Please click on the link to read the links and the readers comments.


Ministers 'ignored advice on inhumane fit-for-work tests'
Welfare adviser says he wanted a delay to work capability tests but government pressed ahead with reassessments



Patrick Butler, social policy editor
*
* The Guardian, Monday 16 December 2013 20.42 GMT
* Jump to comments (356)


http://www.theguardi...-for-work-tests

WCA not a crackdown on scroungers
Professor Malcolm Harrington said he made clear to the then work and pensions minister, Chris Grayling, above, in 2010 that he believed that the work capability assessment was not robust enough to be quickly extended to reassess existing incapacity benefit claimants. Photograph: Dave Thompson/PA

A government welfare adviser has suggested thousands of ill and disabled people were subjected to "inhumane and mechanistic" fit-for-work tests after ministers ignored his advice not to push ahead immediately with plans to reassess 1.5 million claimants on incapacity benefit.


Professor Malcolm Harrington
told the Guardian he believed the work capability assessment (WCA) was "not working very well" when the coalition took power in 2010, and he told ministers a big expansion of the scheme should be delayed for a year to enable the tests to be improved.

Harrington, an occupational health specialist
who carried out three official reviews of the WCA between 2010 and 2012, said: "If they had changed the system to make it more humane I would suggest that some of the people who went through it would have had a less traumatic experience."

Ministers pressed ahead with the reassessment of long-term incapacity benefit (IB) claimants in May 2011, despite Harrington's warnings and campaigners' concerns that the system was flawed. The test has since become politically controversial. Critics say it is crude, inaccurate, discriminates against mentally ill claimants, and causes widespread stress, anxiety and even suicidal feelings among claimants.

About 600,000 reassessments were carried out in 2011 alone. Roughly one in four test decisions have been overturned on appeal after the claimants were wrongly found to be fit for work. Earlier this year a committee of MPs said there were serious weaknesses in the WCA, which is administered by the private Healthcare firm Atos, and that it was "failing far too many people".

The Department for Work and Pensions
said there was no record that Harrington had formally issued the warning to ministers, and he had not raised the speed of rollout as an issue in his interim report to ministers in May 2011.

A spokesman said: "Professor Harrington's remit was to assess the effectiveness of the work capability assessment, not whether to reassess incapacity benefit claimants. He did this and concluded that the assessment was the right one but needed improving." The spokesman added that the DWP has implemented the overwhelming majority of Harrington's recommendations and was "continuing to improve the assessment process".

Harrington, who was hired to advise ministers on how to make the WCA work more effectively, said he made clear to the work and pensions minister, Chris Grayling, at a meeting in summer 2010 that he believed that the WCA was not robust enough to be quickly extended to reassess existing IB claimants.

He said: "I said [to Grayling] 'left to my own devices I would prefer to leave it for a year and let's see what changes we can make for new claimants'. He said 'well, we're going to do it'. I said 'Ok, that's a political decision. I would have preferred to do a roll-out in the second year [2012]'"

Harrington's claim appears to conflict with comments made to parliament by Chris Grayling in February 2012 that Harrington had given his backing to the early "migration" of long term claimants to the WCA. Grayling told MPs Harrington had said in November 2010 that "the system is in sufficient shape for you to proceed with incapacity benefit reassessment."

Harrington said in a Guardian interview in September 2011 that he had "deliberately avoided having an opinion" on whether the roll-out should have gone ahead. But a year later in an email conversation with disability campaigner Sue Marsh he admitted that he "never – repeat never – agreed to the IB migration" and that he would "have preferred it to have been delayed".

Asked why he had wanted to delay the migration of IB claimants, Harrington said he wanted more time to see how the test – which at the time he considered to be "inhumane and mechanistic" – worked on new claimants before introducing it to long-term IB claimants who he said would understandably be "upset, angry and negative" about a test which "questioned their identity".

Harrington, who stood down from his role in July this year, said ministers had been very supportive of his work, and while he believed he had genuinely made improvements over the past three years he felt progress had been too slow. "When you finish you wonder: 'have I made any difference at all?' Only time will tell."

Marsh, who revealed Harrington's opposition to roll out in her blog last week
, said: "If this government had taken Professor Harrington's advice, we may have saved over a million people from going through a test that is unfit for purpose and has caused great suffering and distress. Yet again it seems that all they care about is saving money, never mind the human cost. They must now pause the transfer of existing claimants until assessments can be made safe".
0

Share this topic:


  • 2 Pages +
  • 1
  • 2
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users