ACCforum: What to do if you are required to see a WINZ designated doctor - ACCforum

Jump to content

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

What to do if you are required to see a WINZ designated doctor CRITICAL READ FOR ALL EXITED ONTO BENEFITS

#1 User is offline   redsquare74ucys 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 626
  • Joined: 23-June 07

Posted 16 September 2012 - 07:55 AM

http://waitemataunit...o-see-winz.html

Tuesday, July 10, 2012
What to do if you have to see a WINZ Designated Doctor


Based upon the experience of beneficiaries, we present:



SOME GOOD ADVICE TO APPLICANTS / BENEFICIARIES FACING MEDICAL EXAMINATIONS BY SO-CALLED DESIGNATED DOCTORS, WHO ARE COMMISSIONED AND USED BY WORK AND INCOME AND M.S.D.


CLIENTS/APPLICANTS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO DO THE FOLLOWING:

1. When facing a medical examination under s 44 and s 54B of the Social Security Act 1964 - as part of a review for a sickness or invalid's benefit, clients/applicants should ask to be examined and assessed by a medical practitioner or psychologist of THEIR choice! It has to be a doctor or specialist they do not usually see themselves. So it would pay to look around for one. ONLY when a case manager does reject a chosen medical practitioner or psychologist picked by a client/applicant, can they then tell a person whom to see, which usually still should at least allow a "pick" from a short list (which is what they mostly offer, without even considering a client's/applicant's preference)! Regrettably in at least some cases, WINZ case managers simply told a client or applicant, whom to see - or to restrict their choice to take a pick from a short-list. This doesn’t sufficiently meet the legal provisions though.

"Agreement" must first be attempted between a case manager and client/applicant, before a WINZ case manager can object to a client’s/applicants choice and expect the affected person to see a medical practitioner or psychologist proposed by WINZ/M.S.D.!

2. In selecting a medical practitioner or psychologist under those parts of the Act, a client/applicant should at least try to express the expectation that a professional medical examiner or assessor must have the appropriate, sufficient expertise and qualifications in the areas of health the client/applicant suffers from! This is not clarified sufficiently by the law as it stands, but some would suggest, the law implies that a reasonable effort must be made by WINZ case managers and other staff involved, achieving the best and most appropriate match of medical practitioner/psychologist to the conditions and disabilities a client/applicant suffers from.

At least for the last few years, MSD and WINZ have almost exclusively been referring clients/applicants to GPs, but one must fairly ask how appropriately and sufficiently qualified are general practitioners to professionally and competently assess for instance mental health sufferers, and/or persons with addiction illnesses? Without possessing further (post graduate) qualifications in those areas, it is doubtful or at least uncertain.

This is an area needing further clarification, so by making decisive attempts to get their rights and expectations best met, clients/applicants should be very mindful of their particular needs and what a fair application of the law should mean in their case. It should therefore at least be attempted to raise the expectation to be examined and assessed by the right and most competent, suitably qualified medical professional!

3. When going to a medical examination/assessment by an appointed (agreed or not agreed) medical practitioner/psychologist, a client/applicant should make every effort to go WITH A TRUSTED SUPPORT PERSON! A doctor/psychologist can object to this, but then it should be negotiated with him/her, and also ideally with WINZ, whether a chosen support person should be accepted or not. Certainly any applicant/client affected has a right to be supported, so if one support person is rejected, a reasonable alternative must be accepted. It is advised to inform the medical professional beforehand of a support person to come along.

The support person may be an advocate, a caregiver, a friend, a relative, or

whosoever, but having a witness, who may ideally also take notes, that will ensure that a doctor or other health professional will not be misled or tempted to make any wrong or biased decisions. Medical practitioners and psychologists will be prompted to act carefully, be diligent, thorough and listen to the client/applicant and conduct a truly professional, evidence based, fair and reasonable examination and following assessment.

4. When facing a Medical Appeal Board (see section 53A of the Act) for hearing an appeal against a decision by a “designated doctor” and WINZ, the possible input into who may be appointed to the 3 member panel is not so great, but when presented with the panel, a client/applicant should seriously think again: Is there personnel on the panel, that is expert and qualified enough in the areas of ill health that I suffer from? Do I feel the members are all competent, with the appropriate and sufficient skills and qualifications needed to re-assess my health situation and ability to work or not? If in doubt, this should be raised with M.S.D.’s Medical Appeals Coordinator.

In any case, if there are any serious problems arising from taking these precautions and making such demands, then it will certainly pay to consult a beneficiary advocate. But sections 44 (1) and 54B (3) of the Act should be clear.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….


Sadly most clients/applicants do not think enough about all these important questions, and the possible harmful, negative consequences. Taking those precautions can protect from much wrongdoing and suffering down the line, and thus ensure a fairer treatment by medical practitioners, other health professionals and consequently also WINZ staff.

There may well be changes coming with the new proposed welfare reforms, to be announced by the present government soon. So this space will need to be watched and adjustments to new legal interpretations may become necessary.
What is of a great concern to all affected, is also the fact, that since 2008 the “designated doctors” used by Work and Income and M.S.D. have been TRAINED by the Ministry, which happened under the directions and management of the since 2007 employed Principal Health Advisor, Dr David Bratt (a general practitioner). This is also widely not know, and as the examples with some ACC cases have shown, it pays to be highly alert and cautious about medical examinations conducted by the designated doctors that Work and Income and M.S.D. choose and commission!
1

#2 User is offline   Geri Townsley 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 16-June 12

Posted 16 September 2012 - 09:17 AM

My GP here in Palmy North is Winz approved. I think Winz will only send you to an approved one, if they have questions to ask.
0

#3 User is offline   Bazil Fawlty 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 463
  • Joined: 22-September 03

Posted 16 September 2012 - 12:54 PM

WINZ culture no better than ACC’s
Sunday, 16 September 2012, 11:50 am
Press Release: Green Party

An institutional culture of cost saving has lead WINZ to the same strategy of disentitlement as ACC, said the Green Party today.

WINZ are reviewing existing invalid and sickness beneficiaries with well-documented medical conditions for no other reason than because they are seen to be high cost. Designated doctors are assigned, trained and audited by WINZ. The same doctors can sit on Medical Appeal Boards.

“WINZ beneficiaries told us they watched last week’s 60mins documentary on ACC in absolute horror. They are saying to us that the trauma they are experiencing with WINZ current practises of reviews and medical assessments mirror what they saw ACC clients going through, “Green Party income support spokesperson Jan Logie said.

“Imagine having a mental or physical debilitative illness and having to deal with an institution that treats you as if you're making it up, even with a medical certificate.
Jan Logie said medical assessments must be independent and systems must be in place to guarantee justifiable entitlements.

The amount of money spent by the Medical Appeals Authority who have been requested to review decisions where benefits had been declined trebled in one year of this Government coming to power and continued to increase until figures suddenly disappeared from public scrutiny in 2010

“We all need to know if we are unable to work for medical reasons we can still survive. People should be treated with the respect they deserve. This is a fundamental social contract and ensures all New Zealanders who are unable to work for sound medical reason have a fair future.

“Ms Rebstock’s commitment to culture change at ACC following her appointment as chair must follow through to her board role at WINZ.

“Given the seriousness of our findings the Green Party is calling for an urgent review into the review process for Invalid and sickness beneficiaries, said Ms Logie

http://www.scoop.co....r-than-accs.htm
0

#4 User is offline   fairgo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 290
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 16 September 2012 - 05:06 PM

Is there a list of these 'designated doctors"?
0

#5 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 03 January 2013 - 09:38 PM

View Postfairgo, on 16 September 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

Is there a list of these 'designated doctors"?


Yes, there is!

A list was apparently obtained by someone some time ago, late last year.

I would have expected that this would have been made available by someone here already, but it appears to have been forgotten. Anyway, I managed to get it through a trusted source and wish to keep discretion about that one.

The list had to be converted from Excel into PDF format, as otherwise it could not be attached here. As not all details can be shown on each page, please go by the numbers for each doctor, to match address and other details.

Trusting that this is in the interest of others, who may have had access to it so far, see the attached Excel file for details on this wider forum!

Attached File  MSD, Designated Doctor List, complete, as in August 2012.pdf (76.64K)
Number of downloads: 32
0

#6 User is offline   Tussock 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 330
  • Joined: 18-July 12

Posted 04 January 2013 - 12:51 PM

Post removed

This post has been edited by Tussock: 24 May 2013 - 11:46 AM

0

#7 User is offline   FUCK YOU 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Validating
  • Posts: 216
  • Joined: 26-April 11

Posted 04 January 2013 - 05:31 PM

View Postbirdofparadise, on 04 January 2013 - 12:51 PM, said:

This is great!! Now we need one by catergories that ACC use as the amount of people willing to undertake work for acc must be decreasing as more and more claimants go public with their dealings with a so called govt department which ensure each NZer receives 'best practice'. You have to wonder if acc and winz are the best nz HAS to offer, what the worst must be like?!?!?! Doesn't bear thinking about!!


I look forward to the day I get my second rehabilitation from WINZ after ACC's joke
What would WINZ's rehab be? a wash in some gas showers?

IF ANYBODY WANTS TO RECORD YOUR MEETING READ THIS....

No doubt your assessornator wont allow you to record your meeting, as they could be caught out for there criminal behaviour, but if you want to heres how...

Trademe sells very small camera's and audio recorders for your covert records, (remember browyn pullar covertly recorded ACC and it really paid off) with the lastest tech advances you will be able to afford these devices

I would imagine as ALL the assessornators are criminals, if everyone who could afford to
recorded there meetings, I bet you there would not be so many criminal doctors working in New Zealand,
they would be in there proper professions of washing cars or cleaning toilets.


When / If I have to face one of those dodgy assessors I will definitely be wearing a HD camera button in my cap and tape recorder! possibly even a Wig!
0

#8 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 09 June 2013 - 10:45 PM

MSD and Work and Income rely on about 290 'designated doctors' for "second opinions" and "medical examinations" - more often now to get people shifted off sickness and invalid’s benefits, soon to be changed into other benefit categories. From 15 July 2013 very major changes take effect for the whole benefit system, which were brought in under the 'Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act' earlier this year. There will no longer be a sickness benefit, as those on it will be merged with ordinary unemployed and some former domestic purpose benefit recipients into the Jobseeker Support benefit. They will over time all be assessed for work capacity, and from case to case be deferred for health reasons, until they will be fit for suitable work.

Invalid's beneficiaries and some caring for sick or disabled persons will be put onto the new Supported Living Payment category. While "officially" entitlement criteria will not change, they will in at least some cases over time though also be assessed for work capacity, or be expected to attend measures to improve their chances to return to work.

See these links for general information on the MSD and WINZ websites:

http://www.msd.govt....form/july-2013/
http://www.workandin...enefit-changes/

(I would advise to be apprehensive about the "calming" wording used by the Ministry for the truly very substantial changes coming)


For the implementation of these major reforms, the Ministry of Social Development set up a special panel:

“An expert Health and Disability panel has been established to provide advice on ways to strengthen employment assessments and services for people who are sick or disabled.”

That is a quote from the MSD website! The members on that "advisory panel” have been meeting with, have been advised and apparently been fully convinced by Professor Mansel Aylward, former Chief Medical Officer of DWP in the UK (involved in developing the ATOS work capacity assessments there). Also has Dame C. Black, (another extreme proponent of the “health benefits of work” for sick and disabled) been meeting with that panel. That MSD panel is now determined to get NZ beneficiaries with health conditions firmly ushered into "suitable" open employment.

See the real agenda now, released (with whitened out parts in it) as Cabinet Papers to the media and public (paper C, first one, is most important):

http://www.msd.govt....-disability.pdf

http://www.msd.govt....-a-overview.pdf

http://www.msd.govt....er-b-design.pdf


More info can be found here:

http://www.msd.govt....-ris/index.html


Hardliner Professor Mansel Aylward from the UK (former Chief Medical Officer of the Department for Work and Pensions) will this month (June 2013) speak to at least one national GP conference here in New Zealand (Rotorua and/or Wellington). Doctors are being prepared to tighten up with the issuing work capacity assessments - by not signing people off as unable to work too leniently already.

See details re Mansel Aylwards speech to be held here:

http://www.gpcme.co.nz/speakers.php

He will be speaking on:

“Health Beyond Health: Another Cardinal Role for General Practice
The holistic approach embracing the social determinants of health and the importance of work”

(Main Session, Friday, 21 June 2013, Start 09:25am, Duration: 25mins - Baytrust)


Like every year, Dr David Bratt (WINZ Principal Health Advisor) will speak and/or hold one of his now well known “presentations” there also, likely to again compare “benefit dependence” to “drug dependence”.

Remember these ones:

http://www.gpcme.co....ratt-Hawker.pdf

http://www.gpcme.co....June%202012.pdf
(see especially pages 3, 16 and 33)


Professor Mansel Aylward last year also met with Paula Bennett, Minister for Social Welfare, and she appears keen on bringing in work ability testing along the ATOS Healthcare and DWP lines here in New Zealand:

http://www.beehive.g...l-professionals

Doctors are being told already to look rather at what patients and WINZ clients with illness and disabilities can do, rather than what they cannot do. This is a game-changer, and it makes it extremely more difficult for sick and disabled to qualify for a benefit on health grounds. An expectation to work and/or train comes before entitlement to a benefit, and besides of the usual medical certificates (already called 'Work Capacity Medical Certificates') people will in future face "self assessments", extra interviews by Work and Income staff to discuss "hurdles" and options to return to work, same as a last resort supposedly "independent" assessments on work capacity. The latter are likely to be outsourced at some stage, but likely to be continued by "designated doctors" for the time being.

There are apparently also already efforts being made to attract interested providers to deliver "job search" "employment services" for referring mentally ill target groups into open employment.

This is all going to come into effect in just over a month, and it will be a relentless agenda, yes the implementation of the most radical reforms in this particular area in decades. The mainstream media have reported nothing really – on the very major changes for sick, disabled and incapacitated.

So all those that may be on ACC, but could face to be losing their claims and entitlements, then having to face applying for a benefit from WINZ, this is information that needs to be taken note of.

See attached also some PDF files with the following:

Attached File  wr-cab-paper-a-overview.pdf (2.45MB)
Number of downloads: 1
Attached File  wr-cab-paper-b-design.pdf (5.35MB)
Number of downloads: 0
Attached File  wr-cab-paper-a-appendix-b.pdf (172.67K)
Number of downloads: 0

***PLEASE NOTE THAT A CABINET PAPER C COULD NOT BE UPLOADED, AS IT APPEARS TOO LARGE. I SUGGEST CLICKING THE LINK TO PAPER C ABOVE IN THIS COMMENT!***


We know by now, who tells us more about what really goes on under supposed “independent” assessors of sick and disabled in the UK:

http://atosvictimsgroup.co.uk/
http://blacktriangle...-by-mo-stewart/

Just one further revealing statement or article on the bizarre work capacity assessment regime now common in the UK, and according to Paula Bennett also planned as the design framework to what WINZ will introduce here:

http://blacktriangle...september-2012/


See also this about welfare reforms in the UK:

http://www.guardian....l-tory-minister
http://www.guardian....lfare-poor-risk

More info on Professor Mansel Aylward, the “wayward” medical expert from the ‘Centre for Psychosocial and Disability Research’, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Wales, UK, an extreme proponent of the “work will make you healthy” (and set you free) philosopy, based on a perverted “bio-psycho social model” for health and disability diagnosis and treatment:

http://www.gpcme.co....ylward_2013.php
http://www.gla.ac.uk...a_210440_en.pdf
http://www.guardian....sessment-regime
http://100greatestbo...rity-kills.html
http://www.benefitsa...tid=10&id=97090
http://wheresthebene...disability.html

As there have in the past been some quite bizarre, apparently rather biased recommendations made by "designated doctors" (who are almost exclusively GPs), and as the same apparent bias has applied to recommendations by Regional Health Advisors and Regional Disability Advisors, these news above must be of utmost concern to all affected. An increase of medical examinations - and soon additional, separate work capacity assessments - are to be expected, and the drive will clearly be to use virtual "hatchet doctors" and MSD trained assessors to "cull" clients off the benefits, and to send them to outsourced special employment referral services, who will get paid rewarding fees for every referral made to employers.

Open your eyes, ears and be alert, dear folks!

0

#9 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 10 June 2013 - 01:22 AM

View Postboho refugee, on 09 June 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

Some terrific information & links Marc :)

I also remember Professor Mansel Aylward, former Chief Medical Officer of DWP in the UK saying only a couple of years ago how he believed this too



I guess it all depends on who is paying for the song and dance games some of these spinners will try to shine on tricking :ph34r:



boho refugee - thanks for that link to the article in WalesOnline from 24 April 2008!

That is something quite new to me. It shows me, that Professor Aylward is certainly a "friend" of the bosses and employers, overly mindful of "economic" costs, whatever the causes may be - according to his pseudo scientific "findings".

I am convinced now that he is either a complete "academic nut-case", or mischievous inventor of medical phenomena that are only of his own mental imaginations.

On one hand he is hounding down sick and disabled for "illness belief" and unwillingness to work, and on the other he takes such an approach to people fearful of losing their jobs and putting in a bit of extra time, calling it by the bizarre definition of "presenteism". I never heard of such a concept ever before, and it can only be an invention of Aylward, or one of his pseudo-scientific disciples or "underlings".

That man is unreal, and a danger to true medical science, in particular the "clients" and patients that are made victims of his teachings. He seems to be a kind of PSYCHOPATCH!

God help us, with that academic promoted by Unum insurance, to have any influence on welfare and health policy in New Zealand!

0

#10 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 05 July 2013 - 05:35 PM

VERY IMPORTANT UPDATE ON THE ADVICE GIVEN AND QUOTED ABOVE - DUE TO MAJOR CHANGES TO THE BENEFIT SYSTEM TAKING EFFECT FROM 15 JULY 2013:

Following the passing of the 'Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act 2013' earlier this year, some substantial changes to the 'Social Security Act 1964' will take effect, affecting most, if not all social welfare beneficiaries in New Zealand. See Work and Income's website for some initial information what changes will take place, and how they may affect new applicants and existing recipients of benefits:


http://www.workandin...enefit-changes/

Although Work and Income and the Ministry of Social Development are presenting the changes in a rather "calming" fashion, some changes will be fundamental, severe and draconian, bringing not only new categories of benefits, but also increased obligations, expectations and use of sanctions for non compliance with them.

The above information in this comment thread relies on the legal framework, principally the Social Security Act, as it is up to 14 July 2013, but it soon will need to be seen in context of the new, amended legal provisions that take effect from 15 July. This contribution on ACC Forum is primarily concerned with medical examinations, and how WINZ uses designated doctors (with Regional Health and Disability Advisors in WINZ Regional Offices also being involved).

WINZ will still be using designated doctors, to conduct medical examinations, should the usual doctor or specialist of a client not deliver sufficiently clear information on a client's health condition and incapacity to work, or should that doctor feel the client/patient would better be seen by another doctor or specialist.

Yet is can be expected that the already existing involvement of Regional Health Advisors and Regional Disability Advisors will also be increased, to provide additional or separate recommendations on beneficiaries' health and inability to work. The new amendments to the Act will provide for more work capacity assessments, and for them not being limited to medical aspects only, but to consider further aspects as to whether a client may be able to do some forms of work or training, despite of suffering ill health, a disability, an injury that results in forms of incapacity.

Hence extreme caution is advised as to how to approach any medical examinations by your own doctor/specialist, and most certainly so by a designated doctor, usually suggested and expected by WINZ for "examinations" or "second opinions". As the new law changes will also bring in provisions allowing the Ministry of Social Development and main department Work and Income to OUTSOURCE services, it must be expected, that similar arrangements will be made here in New Zealand, that would resemble the setup in the United Kingdom, where for many years now the 'Department for Work and Pensions' have relied on highly controversial 'ATOS Healthcare' for performing medical and work capacity assessments. Paula Bennett has as Minister commented that they want to ensure mistakes made in the UK will be avoided here, but I leave it to the reader(s) to judge how much you choose to rely on her words.

The new provisions for medical examinations here in New Zealand have not changed all that much as such, but they will be in new sections and subsections of the Social Security Act.


So perhaps have a look at the following links that lead to the on-line versions of the Amendment Act:


Provisions for future 'Jobseeker Support' beneficiaries (on ground of sickness, injury, or disability), who so far were entitled to and covered by the 'Sickness Benefit':

http://www.legislati...DLM4542346.html

New, inserted, section 88E will cover medical examinations for 'Jobseeker Support' applicants/recipients, who will have been former sickness beneficiaries, or persons who would traditionally have applied and qualified for the sickness benefit.


Provisions for future applicants/recipients to/of the 'Supported Living Payment' (on ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness) - persons who would so far have been put on the 'Invalid's Benefit':

http://www.legislati...DLM4750145.html

New, inserted, section 40C will cover the detailed provisions for medical examinations for 'Supported Living Payment' applicants or recipients, who so far applied for and qualified for the 'Invalid's Benefit'.

Please be aware, that there will be a new subcategory of 'Supported Living Payment' beneficiaries, being for persons who are caring for - and supporting a person full-time, who suffers from serious sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness!!!

New, inserted, section 40E will cover medical examinations for the patient being cared for under that category!!!


To see what other changes the 'Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act' will bring, have a look at this link, offering an overview:

http://www.legislati...html#DLM4750145


All those changes will be incorporated and inserted into the principal statute once the changes come into force, and I will endeavour to provide information and a link to the totally new Social Security Act 1964 once it is published via 'New Zealand Legislation' - or once I have time to do so!


Be warned, assessments will in future be possible at the frequency and types as the Ministry of Social Development, i.e. "The Chief Executive" and her/his staff will see fit, and with some services going to be outsourced, there will be many new changes, likely to lead us to untested grounds, as to how they will be implemented, tried and enforced. It pays to be very alert, whether you are losing ACC claim entitlements and have to apply for a benefit, whether you have to apply for a social security benefit due to other reasons, or whether you are already on such a benefit.


Re "WORK ABILITY" ASSESSMENTS see these links:

http://www.legislati...DLM4750211.html

Re review of benefits see this:


http://www.legislati...DLM4750188.html


Re some outsourcing of services:

http://www.legislati...DLM4750241.html

http://www.legislati...DLM4750234.html


SANCTIONS for "FAILURES":

http://www.legislati...DLM4750224.html


Hence the same advice as in above posts (see beginning of thread) is maintained and stressed even more:

Do all to get a support person to accompany you (as a witness) when going to a medical examination by a designated doctor or WINZ proposed/selected specialist, and do the same if separate work capacity assessments will be expected of you.

Ensure your rights under the law are respected, and also do, where possible and legally entitled to, insist on having your own input - into what medical professional, psychologist or other health or disability professional, with the necessary qualifications and competency, you can or are expected see. Ultimately Work and Income may due to the law have the final say, but do not just accept anything they say, and that they try to enforce. If unsure, seek advice from advocates, or if need be a lawyer.



Stay strong, keep your courage, stand up, and make sure your voice and rights are listened to!!!

0

#11 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 05 July 2013 - 06:40 PM

FOR THOSE UNCERTAIN - OR INSUFFICIENTLY INFORMED - ABOUT WHERE THE "JOURNEY" WITH WORK AND INCOME IS HEADING, IF YOU SHOULD DEPEND ON A BENEFIT PAID ON HEALTH GROUNDS, HAVE A LOOK AT THIS ARTICLE THAT WAS PUBLISHED IN THE "HERALD ON SUNDAY" WEEKLY NEWSPAPER ON 30 JUNE 2013!

http://www.nzherald....jectid=10893823

The Ministry of Social Development, the Minister, the Associate Minister and government as a whole, have been incredibly SILENT on this, and the media have otherwise not reported more on these plans by MSD and WINZ. It appears that someone made this information available to the newspaper, and this was not what had been planned or expected. One should perhaps watch this space, as indeed, the law changes and other information out, do suggest that this apparent "trial" will lead to more widespread outsourcing of job referral and other services.

The following links with further information about what may be in store for New Zealand beneficiaries give reasons to be concerned:

http://atosvictimsgr...ag/new-zealand/

http://blacktriangle...Aylward&x=0&y=0

http://www.ccsdisabi...-are-concerning


Some of the likely, willing, partly already prepared "facilitators" here in New Zealand may be:

http://www.tepou.co....g-services/ebse

http://www.workwise....z/about-us/EBSE

http://www.wisegroup...the-wise-family


So while this is so far showing such efforts being made for mentally ill, you can rest assured the same is being prepared for persons suffering incapacity due to musculo-sceletal and other conditions. Workbridge and the likes may be preparing to "assist" people into work.

Rest assured also that the ones like Professor Sir Mansel Aylward from Cambridge University (and his Unum financed "specialist department" that developed a perverted interpretation of the "bio psycho-social model"), same as Dr David Bratt, WINZ Principal Health Advisor, and others are behind this, and we know, that they believe that up to two thirds of "illnesses" sick an disabled suffer from are "not diagnosable" by finding clear physical proof, and according to them must rather be seen as merely "illness belief" cases.

A worrisome development, and New Zealand once again serving as a laboratory for social and other "experiments", I fear.

I am not opposed to offer true, honest, fair and reasonable support and treatment for those sick and disabled (also due to injury), who wish to and can return to some forms of work, but with the information at hand, and the way the welfare reforms were pushed through, ignoring all concerns and objections by those affected, their advocates and families, I fear that such fairness and reasonableness will not be applied.



0

#12 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 31 August 2013 - 10:27 PM

The newest version of the reprinted Social Security Act 1964 (as at 19 August 2013) is out now, and it can be found via this link:

http://www.legislati.../DLM359107.html


It does now appear to contain most, if not all amendments, that came into force with the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act 2013 as of 15 July this year!


There are now different, and much higher work capability and work readiness expectations, and it is now at the discretion of the Chief Executive (that means virtually ANY staff member of MSD or Work and Income - whom a client may have contact with or not), to determine whether a person receiving any benefit, or applying for one, can be work tested, can be assessed for work capability, and who can be expected to discuss work preparation, training, treatment or other measures with!


These following sections make this very clear:

http://www.legislati...DLM5478810.html


Extract:

100B Chief executive may require person to undergo assessment

(1) This subsection applies to a person who is, or who is the spouse or partner of, a beneficiary in receipt of—

(a) sole parent support; or

(b )a supported living payment (except as provided in subsection (2)); or

(c ) an emergency benefit; or

(d) jobseeker support.

(2) Subsection (1)(b ) does not apply to a person receiving a supported living payment on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability if, in the chief executive’s opinion,—

(a) the person is terminally ill; or

(b ) the person has little or no capacity for work, and the person's condition is deteriorating or not likely to improve.

(3) The chief executive may at any time require a person to whom subsection (1) applies to attend and participate in a work ability assessment made to determine, or help to determine, all or any of the following matters:

(a) whether the person is entitled to a benefit and, if so, what kind of benefit:

(b ) if the person is in receipt of jobseeker support (other than jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability), whether the person is entitled on an application under section 88H, or under section 88I(4), to a deferral of work test obligations under section 88I:

(c ) if the person is in receipt of jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability, whether the person has for the purposes of section 88F(2) the capacity to seek, undertake, and be available for part-time work:

(d) whether the person is entitled on an application under section 105 on the ground of limited capacity to meet those obligations to an exemption from work test obligations or work preparation obligations under section 60Q:

(e) whether the person, being a person who is subject to work test obligations or work preparation obligations under section 60Q, has the capacity to meet those obligations:

(f) what is suitable employment for the person for the purposes of section 102A(1)(a), (b ), or ©:

(g) what are suitable activities for the person for the purposes of section 60Q(3) or 102A(1)(f):

(h) what assistance and supports the person needs to obtain employment.

(4) An assessment under subsection (3) must be undertaken in accordance with a procedure determined by the chief executive.

(5) After an assessment under subsection (3) is made, the chief executive may determine the matter or matters in subsection (3) for which that assessment was made—

(a) in reliance on that assessment; or

(b ) having regard to the assessment and to any alternative assessment under subsection (3).

Section 100B: inserted, on 15 July 2013, by section 44 of the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act 2013 (2013 No 13).



See also this section 'Application of work test':

http://www.legislati.../DLM365290.html


Extract:

102 Application of work test

(1) The work test applies to a person while he or she is a work-tested beneficiary, and unless subsection (2) applies, the person is subject to the obligations of the work test set out in section 102A from,—

(a) in the case of a person granted jobseeker support on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability, the date specified in the chief executive's notice under section 88F(4); and

(b ) in any other case, the date on which the work-tested benefit is first paid.

(2) The work test does not apply to a work-tested beneficiary if the chief executive is satisfied that the beneficiary is undertaking employment of the kind required to satisfy the work test for that beneficiary.

(3) A work test obligation set out in section 102A applies on—

(a) a day that is a day between Monday and Friday (inclusive); or

(b ) a day of the week on which regulations under this Act provide (in relation to the obligation, obligations that include it, or all obligations) that it applies.


See this important section also:

http://www.legislati.../DLM365297.html


Extract:

102A Work test obligations

(1) The work test obligations are—

(a) to be available for, and take reasonable steps to obtain, suitable employment; and

(b ) to accept any offer of suitable employment, including temporary employment or employment that is seasonal or subsidised; and

(c ) to attend and participate in an interview for any opportunity of suitable employment to which the beneficiary is referred by the chief executive; and

(d) when required by the chief executive, to attend and participate in any interview with an officer of the department or other person on behalf of the chief executive; and

(e) when required by the chief executive, to undertake planning for employment; and

(f) when required by the chief executive, to participate in or, as the case requires, undertake any of the following activities that the chief executive considers suitable for the beneficiary to improve the beneficiary's work-readiness or prospects for employment:

(i) any work assessment specified by the chief executive:

(ii) any programme or seminar specified by the chief executive to increase particular skills or enhance motivation:

(iii) a work experience or work exploration activity specified by the chief executive:

(iv) employment-related training specified by the chief executive:

(v) any other activity specified by the chief executive (including rehabilitation but not medical treatment); and

(g) to report to the department on his or her compliance with his or her work test obligations as often, and in the manner, as the chief executive from time to time reasonably requires.

(h) [Repealed]

(1A) The drug testing obligations under section 102B(1) are included in, and form part of, each of the work test obligations under subsection (1)(a), ©, and (f)(ii) and (iv) (each of which obligations is extended, and not limited, by this subsection).

(2) Subsection (1)(f) applies whether or not a beneficiary is subject to a sanction for failing to comply with the work test.

(3) A person cannot be required under subsection (1) to undertake activity in the community.

(4) [Repealed]

(5) If the chief executive requires a beneficiary to undertake an activity under subsection (1)(f), the chief executive must take reasonable steps to arrange for the beneficiary to undertake that activity.


And this section is also very important:

60Q Certain obligations may be placed on beneficiaries and their spouses and partners -

http://www.legislati.../DLM362513.html


Extract:

This section applies to every person (other than a person who is a work-tested beneficiary or is for the time being exempted under section 105) who—

(a) is the recipient of a benefit under section 20D (sole parent support) and has a youngest dependent child under the age of 5 years; or

(b ) [Repealed]

(ba) is a sole parent with a dependent child under the age of 1 year, and is a recipient of a benefit under section 88B (jobseeker support) instead of a benefit under section 20D (sole parent support) solely because that child is an additional dependent child (within the meaning of section 60GAE(1)); or

(bb) is the recipient of a benefit under section 40B (supported living payment on the ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness) if the chief executive is satisfied that the person has the capacity to comply with obligations under subsection (3); or

(bc) is the recipient of a benefit under section 40D (supported living payment on the ground of caring for patient requiring care) if the chief executive is satisfied that the person has the capacity to comply with requirements under subsection (3); or

(c ) is the spouse or partner of a person who—

(i) is the recipient of an emergency benefit, a supported living payment, or jobseeker support; and

(ii) has a youngest dependent child aged under 5 years.

(1A) This section also applies (despite subsection (1)) to a person who—

(a) is a work-tested beneficiary (other than one to whom subsection (1)(ba) applies); and

(b ) has been granted under section 88I a deferral of the person's work test obligations.

(1B) The chief executive may require a recipient of a benefit under section 40B or 40D to attend and participate in an interview with an officer of the department, or other person on behalf of the chief executive, for the purpose of helping the chief executive to determine under subsection (1)(bb) or (bc) whether the recipient has the capacity to comply with obligations under subsection (3).

(2) A person to whom this section applies (other than a person to whom subsection (1)(bb) or (bc) applies) has a general obligation to take all steps that are reasonably practicable in his or her particular circumstances to prepare for employment and (in particular) an obligation to comply with any requirement under subsection (3).

(3) The chief executive may, from time to time, require a person to whom this section applies (including, without limitation, a person to whom subsection (1)(bb) or (bc) applies)—

(a) to undertake planning for employment:

(aa) to attend and participate in an interview (other than one for the purpose specified in subsection (1B)) with an officer of the department or other person on behalf of the chief executive:

(ab) to report to the department or to any other person acting on behalf of the chief executive on the person's compliance with the person's obligations under this section as often as, and in the manner that, the chief executive reasonably requires:

(b ) to participate in or undertake (as the case requires) any of the following activities specified by the chief executive that the chief executive considers suitable to improve his or her work-readiness or prospects for employment:

(i) a work assessment:

(ii) a programme or seminar to increase particular skills or enhance motivation:

(iii) a work-experience or work-exploration activity:

(iv) employment-related training:

(v) an education programme:

(vi) any other activity (including rehabilitation) other than medical treatment, voluntary work, or activity in the community.



[b] ADVICE:

To avoid any doubt, if the 'Chief Executive', which can be a normal case manager [/b](who may rely on evidence before her or him, or additional "advice" by a Regional Health Advisor or Regional Disability Advisor, or also relies on a designated doctor recommendation instead of, or additional to one own doctor's medical assessment, PLUS additional information, some of which has not been much specified by the Ministry), does consider a person can do some work, any of these measures can be taken, and if the client refuses or does not co-operate, a cut or total stop of a client's benefit will be likely!!!


So with all these much stricter criteria, and work capability not just being determined on medical certificates alone anymore, very many who suffer disabilities or longer term, serious illness, and with that are incapacitated, will in future be considered capable of doing some work. The emphasis is now to have even doctors and rehab professionals look first and foremost at what sick and disabled persons can do, rather than what they cannot!


Thus medical examinations and assessments of any kind will become even more important and crucial, if you suffer illness, disabilities and therefore also incapacity. It will be essential to follow the above advice, to go to such examinations and assessments, with doctors, with other health professionals, with WINZ staff, with outsourced service providers, or any other involved service deliverer - TOGETHER WITH A TRUSTED SUPPORT PERSON AND WITNESS!!!



These are the new provisions for medical examinations -


For Jobseeker Support category applicants or recipients:

http://www.legislati...DLM5478532.html


Extract:

88E Jobseeker support: on ground of sickness, injury, or disability: medical examination

(1) A person making an application for jobseeker support on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability (the applicant) must include in the application a certificate that complies with subsections (2) and (3).

(2) A certificate complies with this subsection only if it is given—

(a) by a medical practitioner in respect of any condition; or

(b ) by a dentist in respect of a condition that is within the ambit of his or her profession; or

(c ) by a midwife in respect of a pregnancy, childbirth, or any related condition that is within the ambit of his or her profession; or

(d) by a health practitioner of a kind specified for the purposes of this paragraph in regulations made under section 132 and in respect of a condition within the ambit of his or her scope of practice.

(3) A certificate complies with this subsection only if it—

(a) certifies that the applicant's capacity for work is affected by sickness, injury, or disability; and

(b ) indicates the nature of the sickness, injury, or disability concerned, the extent to which the applicant's capacity for work is affected by it, and the length of time that effect is likely to last; and

(c ) contains any other particulars the chief executive may under this paragraph require.

(4) The chief executive may at any time require the applicant or a jobseeker support beneficiary to submit himself or herself for examination by a medical practitioner or psychologist. The medical practitioner or psychologist must be agreed for the purpose between the applicant or beneficiary and the chief executive or, failing agreement, must be nominated by the chief executive.

(5) The medical practitioner or psychologist must prepare, and must send the chief executive a copy of, a report that indicates—

(a) whether the applicant's or beneficiary's capacity for work is affected by sickness, injury, or disability; and

(b ) the extent to which the applicant's or beneficiary's capacity for work is affected by the sickness, injury, or disability concerned; and

(c ) whether, and if so, for how long, that capacity is likely to continue to be affected by the sickness, injury, or disability concerned.


For Supported Living Payment applicants or recipients:

http://www.legislati...DLM5469765.html


Extract:

40C Supported living payment: on ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness: medical examination

(1) This section applies to a person who is an applicant for, or a person in receipt of, a supported living payment on the ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness.

(2) The chief executive may require the applicant or beneficiary to submit himself or herself for examination by a medical practitioner or a psychologist. The medical practitioner or psychologist must be agreed for the purpose between the applicant or beneficiary and the chief executive, or, failing agreement, must be nominated by the chief executive.

(3) The medical practitioner or psychologist must certify whether, in the medical practitioner's or psychologist's opinion, the applicant or beneficiary is, or is not, or whether there is doubt about whether the applicant or beneficiary is or is not,—

(a) permanently and severely restricted in his or her capacity for work; or (as the case may be)

(b ) totally blind.

(4) A certificate given under this section must state the grounds upon which the opinion is founded.

(5) A certificate given under this section must, in the case of doubt referred to in subsection (3), and may, in any other case, indicate a date for review of the permanency, severity, or both, of the applicant's or beneficiary's sickness, injury, or disability.


The new provisions for Appeals to a Medical Board:


http://www.legislati...DLM5487423.html


Extract:

Appeals to medical board

Heading: inserted, on 15 July 2013, by section 62 of the Social Security (Benefit Categories and Work Focus) Amendment Act 2013 (2013 No 13).

10B Right of appeal on medical grounds

(1) Any applicant or beneficiary affected may appeal to the Board against a decision of the chief executive that is—

(a) a decision that a claim for a child disability allowance is declined, or that any such allowance is cancelled, in either case on the ground that the child is not a child with a serious disability (within the meaning of section 39A(1) and (2)); or

(b ) a decision that a claim for a supported living payment on the ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness is declined, or that any such benefit is cancelled, in either case on medical grounds; or

(c ) a decision under section 60Q(1)(bb) that a person in receipt of a supported living payment on the ground of sickness, injury, disability, or total blindness has the capacity to comply with obligations under section 60Q(3); or

(d) a decision under section 60Q(1)(bc) that a person in receipt of a supported living payment on the ground of caring for a patient requiring care has the capacity to comply with obligations under section 60Q(3); or

(e) a decision that a claim for jobseeker support on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability is declined on medical grounds or on grounds relating to a person's capacity for work, or that a person's jobseeker support on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability is cancelled on medical grounds or on grounds relating to the person's capacity for work; or

(f) a determination under section 88F(2) that a jobseeker support beneficiary on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability has, while receiving that benefit, the capacity to seek, undertake, and be available for part-time work, and so is required to comply with the work test on and after a date specified in a notice under section 88F(4); or

(g) a confirmation, amendment, revocation, or replacement under section 88F(6) of a determination, and that results in a determination of the kind specified in paragraph (f) of this subsection; or

(h) a decision on medical grounds under section 88I(2) to decline an application under section 88H(2) by a beneficiary granted jobseeker support (other than jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability) for deferral of all or any of the beneficiary's work test obligations; or

(i) a decision on medical grounds under section 88I(7) to revoke a deferral granted under section 88I of all or any work test obligations of a beneficiary granted—

(i) jobseeker support (other than jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability); or

(ii) jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability; or

(j) any of the following made in reliance on any work ability assessment by a health practitioner under section 100B:

(i) a determination whether the person assessed is entitled to a benefit and, if so, what kind of benefit:

(ii) a determination whether the person assessed, being a person in receipt of jobseeker support (other than jobseeker support granted on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability), is entitled on an application under section 88H, or under section 88I(4), to deferral of work test obligations under section 88I:

(iii) a determination whether the person assessed, being a person in receipt of jobseeker support on the ground of sickness, injury, or disability, has for the purposes of section 88F(2) the capacity to seek, undertake, and be available for part-time work:

(iv) a determination whether the person assessed, being a person who is subject to work test obligations or work preparation obligations under section 60Q, has the capacity to meet those obligations; or

(k) a decision under section 116C(2)(a) to the effect that a beneficiary does not have a good and sufficient reason, on the ground that the beneficiary is addicted to, or dependent on, controlled drugs, for either or both:

(i) not complying with a drug testing obligation under section 102B(1):

(ii) failing to apply for suitable employment that requires candidates to undertake drug tests; or

(l) a decision to decline a claim for a veteran's pension under section 70 of the War Pensions Act 1954, or to cancel any such pension, in either case on the ground of the applicant's or beneficiary's mental or physical infirmity.

(2) An appeal under this section must be made within—

(a) 3 months after the decision has been communicated to that person; or

(b ) any further period the Board may (if it considers there is good reason for the delay) allow on application made before or after the end of that 3-month period.

(3) The chief executive is bound by the Board's decision on an appeal under this section.

(4) The Board is to comprise 3 members to be appointed by the chief executive for the particular purpose, being medical practitioners, rehabilitation professionals (as defined in subsection (5)), or other persons having appropriate expertise in the fields of vocational training or vocational support for persons with sickness, injury, or disability.

(5) Rehabilitation professional, in subsection (4), means a person who is—

(a) a person professionally engaged in the rehabilitation of persons from sickness or accident or with disabilities; or

(b ) a nurse; or

(c ) an occupational therapist; or

(d) a physiotherapist; or

(e) a psychologist.


SUMMARISED ADVICE:

It pays to be extra careful now, and I can assure any persons facing having to apply for a benefit on health and disability grounds, to get good, sound advice, to take note of what this post explains, to also look at other posts on this site, and for instance search for anything under "assessment", "medical assessment", "David Bratt" (the name of WiNZ's so-called "Principal Health Advisor"), and possibly also speak to an advocate, should any major questions or issues arise!

Few will in future get exempted from work testing and work expectations, and even doctors have been advised to be firm on patients seeking Work Capacity Medical Certificates, which are now so designed to ensure anything is looked at what can enable a person to resume any kind of work a.s.a.p.! Some will surely get a wake up call, as most have not taken note of what the last and major welfare reforms have entailed.

0

#13 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 31 August 2013 - 11:27 PM

HERE IS A SUMMARY LIST OF ALL 'DESIGNATED DOCTORS' THAT THE MINISTRY OF SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT HAD ON THEIR BOOKS IN AUGUST 2012:

As their selected, trained and paid doctors do not change all that much and often, the list should more or less still be valid, without perhaps the odd exception. I will also try to attach a better presented, tidier and table format list as PDF file to this comment.




AUCKLAND REGION:
CLIFFORD BRIAN AH KIT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NEELA AHMED, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CECIL W ANTONY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SAMIR ANWAR, REHAB MEDICINE
MARK ARBUCKLE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICK BARBER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
FIONA BROW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAEME BROWN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
USHA CHAND, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SIDNEY TASMAN CHOY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HUBERT D'CRUZE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
KALAWATI DEVA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MICK EASON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ADRIAN GANE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MATTHEW SCOTT GENTRY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRUCE STEPHEN GREENFIELD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARK GROEN, GENERAL REGISTER
CHRISTOPHER GROSS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
AIDEEN HAWKINS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JANE HENRYS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HARRY HILLEBRAND, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID HOADLEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MICHELLE HOLLIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BERNARD KEITH HOLMES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SHERYL HOWARTH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IVAN HOWIE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NEIL HUTCHISON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARK JOHNSTON, MUSCULOSKELETAL MED.
ROY KNILL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHRISTINE LIPYEAT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GAVIN LOBO, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DEXTER LOOS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MALCOLM LOWE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALISTAIR DEAN MACKAY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
WILLIAM MACKEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GARY MACLACHLAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HEIDI MACRAE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
UMESH PARBHU, GENERAL REGISTER
ROGER PARR, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GITA PATEL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDRE PEYROUX, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHRISTOPHER (CHRIS) RADLOFF, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CREASAN REDDY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JONATHAN REES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HELEN SHRIMPTON, GENERAL REGISTER
ANNIE SI, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALISON SORLEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CAROLYN SUTTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JUAN TOLEDO, GENERAL REGISTER
RENATA TOLKS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SIOBHAN TREVALLYAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER VINCENT, GENERAL REGISTER
JULIET WALKER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAEME WHITTAKER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER WOODWARD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RODNEY (ROD) WYNNE-JONES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

BAY OF PLENTY REGION:
JOHN AIKEN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GARETH BLACKSHAW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NIGEL BRUCE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GORDON CALDWELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHARLOTTE (JANE) CARMAN, GENERAL REGISTER
TIM CHIARI, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BERNARD CONLON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW CORIN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JUDITH DONNELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SIMON FIRTH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALASTAIR FRASER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAN GOURLAY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
COLIN HELM, GENERAL REGISTER
ROBERT HILLIGAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD HUDSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BARRY KNIGHT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAIN LOAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HELEN MCDOUGALL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SIMON MEECH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PAUL NOONAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRITTA NOSKE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID OFFNER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROSEMARY PEDLEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRIAN PERCIVAL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NEIL POSKITT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SYMON ROBERTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MALCOLM SCOTT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOSEPH (JOE) SCOTT-JONES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GUNAWEN SETIADARMA, GENERAL REGISTER
DEAN TASKER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAEME TINGEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
TESSA TURNBULL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOHN VICKERS, PSYCHIATRY
MARYANN WATSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROGER WILLIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

CANTERBURY REGION:
PHILIP ASHCROFT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
AVA RUTH BAKER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JANE BATCHELOR GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAEME PAUL BENNETTS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHEN (STEVE) BERRYMAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROBERT J BLACKMORE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAEME GEORGE CARPENTER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HARSED HIRALAL CHIMA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALAN CRIGHTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAN CURRIE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOHN L DEWSBURY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD M EDMOND, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANTHONY JOHN FERRIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
WILLIAM GORDON (BILL) GORDON, PSYCHIATRY
JAMES PHILIP GRAY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER HARTY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
LEWIS JOHN HUDSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CLIVE HUNTER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STUART KENNEDY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER LAW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
KEVIN ROSS LEE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHEN LEWIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOANNE MACGREGOR, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW M MANNING, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALEXANDER JAMES MARSHALL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD ANTHONY MCCUBBIN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHEN A MCGREGOR, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
WILLIAMPAUL(BILL) MCSWEENEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER IAN MOODY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD NEWMAN GENERAL, PRACTITIONER
VIVIENNE PATTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID RICHARDS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAHAM GEORGE RITCHIE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID RITCHIE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JANET PATRICIA ROBINSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BEVAN LLOYD ROGERS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID ROLLINSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER HUGH SHARR, GENERAL REGISTER
MURRAY RUSSEL SMITH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
LINDSAY JOHN WILLIAM STRANG, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JEFF THOMPSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GERALDINE FIONA TREVELLA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PAUL WANTY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HAMMOND WILLIAMSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HOWARD WILSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARK WINTER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
REX YULE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

CENTRAL REGION:
PAULINE BLACKMORE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
KELVIN DE GINDER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JURRIAAN DE GROOT, REHAB MEDICINE
KHONDOKER MAHEN HABIB, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JULIAN JAMES-ASHBURNER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DELAMY KEALL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHRIS LANE , GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JANE LAVER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHANUS (STEPHAN) LOMBARD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
QUENTIN MACMURRAY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RITA EILEEN MIDDLETON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JONATHAN MORTON, GENERAL REGISTER
IYNKARAN PATHMANATHAN (NATHAN), GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GREIG RUSSELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SAM WILSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RENNIE YOUNG, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

EAST COAST REGION (NORTH ISLAND):
TIMOTHY R (TIM) BEVIN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
AVANI KARL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JONATHAN (JON) EAMES, GENERAL REGISTER
KAMAL KARL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD LOAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RACHEL MONK, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
VIVIAN (VIV) ROBERTS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALAN WRIGHT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

NELSON REGION (INCL. WEST COAST, MARLBOROUGH):
PEDER AHNFELDT-MOLLERUP, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GLENDA BARBER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARIJKE BOERS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
TIM BOLTER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID (BUZZ) BOOTHMAN-BURRELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANNA DYZEL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER GRIFFITHS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
TIMOTHY (TIM) HANBURY-WEBBER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NICHOLAS G HASSAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRUCE LINTERN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
LUCIA MITCHELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STUART MOLOGNE, GENERAL REGISTER
FIONA JANE MORRIS, GENERAL REGISTER
IAIN RUSSELL, GENERAL REGISTER
MARTIN SMITH, GENERAL REGISTER
GREVILLE WOOD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

NORTHLAND REGION:
KATHLEEN BAKKE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GEIR BJORNHOLDT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SIMON DAVID BRISTOW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SHANE CROSS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GRAHAM FENTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAN MARK HOFFER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STUART D NORRIE, GENERAL REGISTER
SUZANNE PHILLIPS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAN CHRISTOPHER SMIT, GENERAL REGISTER
JONATHAN SPRAGUE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANTHONY (TONY) STEELE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER GEORGE H SUMMERS, GENERAL REGISTER
ALISTAIR D WHITTON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CECIL WILLIAMS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

SOUTHERN REGION (SOUTH ISLAND):
DAVID ALLEN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PAUL BENNETT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NEIL BUNGARD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOANNE CANNON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
THERESA P COCKS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JAMES (JIM) COLLINS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DIANA ALISON COOK, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SARAH CREEGAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARK CURTIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHEN J DAWSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROGER DEACON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RONALD LEON DITTRICH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER FETTES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
LINDSAY (ROSS) FIELDES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NICHOLAS (NICK) GIBLIN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
WILLIAM GROVE, GENERAL REGISTER
PATRICIA (PAT) HASTILOW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROBERT STANLEY HEPBURN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARIUS HILL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MURRAY JUDGE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
COLEEN LEWIS, GENERAL REGISTER
TABITHA LUECKER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
EMMA MACCALLUM, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW IAN MCLEOD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARY MCSHERRY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRYAN MOORE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANTHONY (TONY) MORRIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
WAYNE MORRIS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRENDAN PAULEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JONATHON (JON) SCOTT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRUCE SMALL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
NICHOLAS TERPSTRA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARTYN IAN WILLIAMSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHRISTINE WILLIAMSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW WILSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

TARANAKI REGION:
DAVID E BALDWIN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ESTHER BGANYA, PSYCHIATRY
JOHN CANTILLON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JAMES (JIM) CORBETT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW (ANDY) CORSER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANNE FARNELL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SAMIR HEBLE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
TREVOR HURLOW, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MURTAZA K (MUZU) KHANBHAI, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANTHONY ROSS MARSHALL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID MCLEAN, GENERAL REGISTER
JOHN MOORE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MANJUR MORSHED, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SUJATHA GRACE PAUL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
HAROLD EDWIN PFEFFER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BRUCE RONALD PHILLIPS, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SATYA PRAKASH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
GAIL RICCITELLI, PSYCHIATRY
MANMOHAN SINGH, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DAVID TALBOT, SURGEON
MICHELLE TODD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANTHONY (CAMPBELL) WHITE, INTERNAL MEDICINE
LYN WHITE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
KENNETH YOUNG, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

WAIKATO REGION:
MARY BALLANTYNE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RICHARD BALLANTYNE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ROSS DOUGLAS BLAIR, SURGEON
FARINA BRADY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SHRI CHAND, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JOHN COLLIER, PSYCHIATRY
M K RANJITH COORAY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SANDRA FLOOKS, GENERAL REGISTER
MOHAMED HARIS FUARD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
SUE GENNER, GENERAL REGISTRY
SUZANNE GREAVES, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PETER HARRISON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
KERRY HENNESSY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
THOMAS FRASER HODGSON, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
STEPHEN (STEVE) JOE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MICHAEL KAHAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ZIYAD (ZIG) KHOURI, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
AMRIT LAD, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
REETA LOCHAN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MICHAEL J MILLER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
CHRISTOPHER (CHRIS) MILNE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ANDREW MINETT, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
DANIEL J (DANNY) NEAVE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
JANE O'DWYER, PSYCHIATRY
ASIT PAREKH, GENERAL REGISTER
DEEPANI PERERA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
ALFRED PINFOLD, GENERAL REGISTER
NAVIN RAJAN, GENERAL REGISTER
RAJINDER K SAINI, GENERAL REGISTER
LYUTSIYA S (LUCY) SLOOTSKY, GENERAL REGISTER
CHRISTOPHER MICHAEL SMILEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
BARBARA LESLEY TOPPING, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
MARK VAUGHAN, GENERAL REGISTER
BARRIE LEWIS WINN, GENERAL PRACTITIONER

WELLINGTON AND HUTT REGION:
GUY JENNER, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
RANATUNGA A KALUPAHANA, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PATRICIA NEAL, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
PENELOPE (PENNY) ROWLEY, GENERAL PRACTITIONER
IAN ST GEORGE, GENERAL PRACTITIONER


These are the names that were on a list that was current as of 20 August 2012, and the regions listed are MSD regional administrative areas (hence some may also include close neighbouring geographical areas).

Please bear in mind that some of these "designated doctors" are used more frequently than others, yes, anecdotal information says that some are true "hatchet doctors", as they appear to deliver the recommendations that WINZ and MSD prefer, similar to the way ACC uses some "preferred" assessors, although they will of course never admit this!

Again, read the advice at the very top of this thread of comments, and also take note of all other information offered here, particularly that more recently updated, as it includes the current provisions under the newly reformed, stringent and draconian welfare regime, we can thank Paula Bennett, John Key, Bill English and their selected "advisors" for!


For some further information also check the website of the Medical Council for registration details and so forth!

http://www.mcnz.org....stered-doctors/


0

#14 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 01 September 2013 - 12:18 AM

Please find attached a more detailed Designated Doctor list in this PDF file, downloadable for registered members and readers:


Attached File  MSD, Designated Doctor List, complete, as in August 2012.pdf (76.64K)
Number of downloads: 5
0

#15 User is offline   Sparrow 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 22-March 07

Posted 01 September 2013 - 09:50 PM

I am very disturbed to find that there are 2 Doctors listed under Canterbury who have been the subjectof Discipline from the Medical Council.- as well as coming up before the courts.

these two doctors have done serious harm to some patients and in one case one Patient died thru his unconventional treatment.

these Doctors are there to work for Winz ARE THEY?

dodgy AND VERY WRONG
0

#16 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 01 September 2013 - 11:55 PM

Sparrow -


The doctors (almost exclusively GPs, that is 'general practitioners'), are ALL the selected ones that WINZ use as so-called "designated doctors", who have been trained, are "consulted" and overseen by the Ministry of Social Development's Principal Health Advisor Dr David Bratt, and he should ring alarm bells anyway!

These doctors are used to get "second opinions" on sick or disabled beneficiaries, and their recommendations are usually relied on by the Regional Health and Disability Advisors, who then pass the same recommendations on to case managers, who in virtually all cases then base their decisions to grant benefits, or to not do so, on those recommendations received
.

Indeed, the doctors listed were in August last year the current ones in use, and they are most likely still the same ones, as there are not that many changes in the ones WiNZ use.

So persons should approach these doctors with great caution, and well prepared, and go only with trusted support persons (willing to be witnesses) for any examinations to be conducted by them.

I am not surprised you spotted two in Canterbury, who have already a bad reputation. I know at least two in the Auckland region, who I will not name, but of whom I can testify, to be highly biased, and to be treated with great caution and suspicion!

That is the very purpose of me having put the information here.

Rgds Marcus



View PostFrom 01 September 2013 - 09:50 PM:

I am very disturbed to find that there are 2 Doctors listed under Canterbury who have been the subjectof Discipline from the Medical Council.- as well as coming up before the courts.

these two doctors have done serious harm to some patients and in one case one Patient died thru his unconventional treatment.

these Doctors are there to work for Winz ARE THEY?

dodgy AND VERY WRONG

0

#17 User is offline   Sparrow 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 22-March 07

Posted 02 September 2013 - 03:41 PM

Two people have died as a result of these two doctors misdiagnoses and/or ,malpractice..

One doctor treated a lady who had a tumour that was in the end the size of a pumpkin as obese and gave her tranquiisers and anti fat pills.

the hospital Specialists, when she was urgently admitted were so furious at the blatant misdiagnosis that they reported this guy.

Now he is deciding that people are fit for work or not.

I just could scream!
0

#18 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 12 November 2013 - 12:39 AM

THOSE WHO ARE FACING A WINZ DESIGNATED DOCTOR ASSESSMENT OR EXAMINATION, OR WHO MAY HAVE HAD TROUBLING EXPERIENCES WITH ONE, YOU SHOULD ALSO HAVE A READ OF THE FOLLOWING TOPICS AND COMMENT THREADS, AS THEY SHED A LOT MORE LIGHT ON WHAT HAS BEEN - AND STILL IS - BEHIND ALL THIS "AGENDA" THAT SO MANY SICK AND DISABLED ARE BEING CONFRONTED WITH:


'DESIGNATED DOCTORS – used by WORK AND INCOME, some also used by ACC: THE TRUTH ABOUT THEM!'

http://accforum.org/...so-used-by-acc/



'MEDICAL AND WORK CAPABILITY ASSESSMENTS - BASED ON THE CONTROVERSIAL BIO PSYCHO-SOCIAL MODEL, AIMED AT DISENTITELING AFFECTED FROM WELFARE BENEFITS AND ACCIDENT COMPENSATION: THE AYLWARD - UNUM LINK':

http://accforum.org/...-and-acc-compo/


0

#19 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10346
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:54 PM

I have been trying to get both the ACC and WINZ To submit me to their medical assessors and designated doctors so as to establish the degree of my incapacity. It seems to me that both the ACC and WINZ have colluded together so as I have never seen by any of their medical professionals given that the ACC have relied upon members of the public as an alternative to the medical profession. The ACC had claimed to both civil and criminal courts that I was not incapacitated reaching the conclusion that I had somehow misled the medical profession yet don't want a medical profession of the road to come near me. I find this situation extraordinary given that many people complain that they are seeing both acc and WINZ medical professionals far too frequently and even unnecessarily. Something is gravely wrong with the situation. I should not be treated differently to others and that both state entities should be forced to rely upon the medical profession.
0

#20 User is offline   Marc 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 208
  • Joined: 08-November 12

Posted 05 February 2014 - 08:49 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 13 November 2013 - 09:54 PM, said:

I have been trying to get both the ACC and WINZ To submit me to their medical assessors and designated doctors so as to establish the degree of my incapacity. It seems to me that both the ACC and WINZ have colluded together so as I have never seen by any of their medical professionals given that the ACC have relied upon members of the public as an alternative to the medical profession. The ACC had claimed to both civil and criminal courts that I was not incapacitated reaching the conclusion that I had somehow misled the medical profession yet don't want a medical profession of the road to come near me. I find this situation extraordinary given that many people complain that they are seeing both acc and WINZ medical professionals far too frequently and even unnecessarily. Something is gravely wrong with the situation. I should not be treated differently to others and that both state entities should be forced to rely upon the medical profession.



I honestly cannot understand all this. If anyone may have been accused of "misleading", would this not mean your doctor or specialists "mislead" themselves??? There are competency issues involved, I am not sure how far you explored that, but I know, it is a MINEFIELD. The ACC blamed you of virtual "criminal" conduct, but that seems absurd, even if you may have been accused of "exaggerating" things, it is the responsibility of a doctor or medical expert to COMPETENTLY and PROFESSIONALLY assess and diagnose you.

If they cannot do so, they are themselves faulty and to blame. I do not know where your case is at, but it seems ridiculous, from what I read.

Best wishes.
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