ME Association and Carol Monaghan meeting with DWP Minister about benefits

“Re-assessments, which form part of the on-going review process, should be reduced in frequency where a person can supply medical evidence to show that their condition has stabilised for a period of years and that all appropriate approaches to management have been tried. Information on 5-year prognosis in ME/CFS from the CMO report was referred to here.”

I’m confused - what would the appropriate approaches to management be?
 
dangermouse said:
I’m confused - what would the appropriate approaches to management be?
Click to expand...
No idea, but I suspect it helped my case that I had been through the local ME service process (even though it was 8 years ago and just a few home visits from an OT who had nothing to offer except stuff I already knew). That presumably meant they could tick that box. It could, I guess, also mean showing you have been in contact with your GP. My daughter had one of her benefits refused some years ago on the grounds that she hadn't seen any doctor for over a year.
 
dangermouse said:
“Re-assessments, which form part of the on-going review process, should be reduced in frequency where a person can supply medical evidence to show that their condition has stabilised for a period of years and that all appropriate approaches to management have been tried. Information on 5-year prognosis in ME/CFS from the CMO report was referred to here.”

I’m confused - what would the appropriate approaches to management be?
Click to expand...


I think that’s likely to be interpreted in practice as having gone through an NHS CFS clinic. ETA see @Trish already made that point. The powers that be can’t argue that there is anything that could “help” if you’ve already gone to the clinic and it hasn’t helped. It’s rather Russian roulette approach though because if you go to the CFS clinic not knowing that you need to be wary of their approach you are at risk of harm.
 
NelliePledge said:
I think that’s likely to be interpreted in practice as having gone through an NHS CFS clinic. ETA see @Trish already made that point. The powers that be can’t argue that there is anything that could “help” if you’ve already gone to the clinic and it hasn’t helped. It’s rather Russian roulette approach though because if you go to the CFS clinic not knowing that you need to be wary of their approach you are at risk of harm.
Click to expand...

Damned if you do and damned if you don’t - good old Catch 22.
 
dangermouse said:
Damned if you do and damned if you don’t - good old Catch 22.
Click to expand...
I sort of managed to get away with going to the CFS clinic although in retrospect I did end up increasing activity while I was doing the programme at least I knew enough not to try going for daily walks or anything like that. And at least it is on record that I’ve done that so I can’t have not doing it held against me.
 
”Case law states that if someone cannot carry out a descriptor task for a significant period (i.e. more than an hour) within a day they should be considered as being unable to do that descriptor task for the entire day.”
Click to expand...

Id like to see the case law they are referring to because from my understanding this is a gross oversimplification of the reliability rule. Especially giving a seemingly arbitrary time like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom