Time for recovery is the government out of step with reality?

As you may have seen the government will reduce payment of ESA to people in the work related activity group after 1 year in order to encourage people back to work. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/esa-time-limit-wr2011-ia.pdf

However is this time limit far too limiting?

Coming from a mental health stand point I find this short time span particularly short-sighted in its’ woeful inadequacy to understand the length of time it takes for many to recovery.

Severe mental disturbance though treatable has for many an undeterminable treatment length. People may for years waver in their ability to withstand society and its’ rigor which has meant that many have indeed been on benefit for long lengths of time and regardless of monetary encouragement going back to work is not something they are able to do.

Although their treatment is moving forward this does not mean they will not relapse. ESA does allow for people to move back and forth between groups however it seems to me unlikely that people will move from work related activity to the support group without major relapse and I question whether it is likely to happen?

Most people acknowledge a two steps forward threes steps back progress when it comes to talking therapies and it is often said that you feel worse and exhibit more symptoms during the initial period than in the latter stages. I would hope that this would result in people be reassessed into the unfit for work group but I am painfully aware that it is unlikely. Equally I am painfully aware that accessing therapy is difficult and I wonder that the government hasn’t been reminded of the atrocious waiting lists for some talking therapies.

I wonder whether they have not considered how angry people will become that although they are working to go back to work the major obstacle is a 6month waiting list for treatment. I question whether we really need to worry about money even more than we already do as we head into the most difficult part of our recovery?

And yes I realise that this is a universal policy that applies to all ill health however it seems that the government are not safe guarding our right to good  mental health by implementing a system that is so flawed it is bound to increase recovery times.

When I look at the severity of illness that has reduced people to living on benefit I do not see that treatments that last only 3-4 months and require one session a week are actually suitable to give sustainable recovery. In fact I would suggest that most of those people are engaged in services with estimates of at least 2 years worth of treatment on intensive programs with attendance of three days a week.

It seems obvious that these people would be considered not suitable for work until they have completed their treatment, however it is not the case for all.

Some of the people attending the preparatory group are on ESA in the work related activity group and despite their adherence to this treatment program they have had to fight to stay on benefit so that they can complete it. Once into the community it seems that this problem disappears however it would be foolish to consider that it has not cost the country money due to the stress it is causing these people and the increased time it has taken them to prepare as a consequence.

It seems to me that this country has not thought past the short term cuts to see and understand the ramifications of the decisions it is making and the costs it will encur as a consequence of getting it wrong.

I guess you may think that those suffering mental health problems that severe are a small proportion of the actual number claiming benefit. Well maybe you’re right but given the waiting lists for talking therapies, the increasing numbers of people seeking therapy, and the governments own estimates for the future, surely, it taking the time to get a system that will work well is far more important than change for changes’ sake. Remember ESA was supposed to save us millions and it has cost the country many more times that to implement it and it still has a 40% appeal rate of which 35-40% are successful.

And out of interest do you really know how many people it is?

For instance The local Complex needs service. Therapeutic communities of which there are two, both with 20 places. There are 3 preparatory groups, with an estimated 35-55 members in each. This means around 180 people are actively seeking help for severe mental health problems and those are just the ones who feel able.

Doesn’t sound much, maybe not, but that’s just South Bucks and it does not show how many people are either engaged in therapy or waiting for it with either Healthy minds (6months waiting list) or Psychological Services (6months waiting list) Nor all the local charity lists that provide services for free or ‘what you can afford’.

That not all these people with be claiming benefit is true however without therapy people are likely to become worse and then what?

My personal experience suggests that the vast majority of people engaged in these services are not working full time, either because they have part time work and are claiming some benefit or because they are regularly taking sick leave, which is not sustainable and cutting benefit is not the answer they are motivated enough.