Forum Home → Discussion → Other benefit issues → Thread
Mental health training for jobcentre staff
The DWP have approached the Royal College of Psychiatrists with a view to them providing front line staff with training on dealing with claimants with mental health issues. I have an opportunity to go to the initial meeting looking at what that might entail. Obviously I have some idea of what the issues are for claimants with mental health problems but I welcome input from everyone about what they think are the key issues and I will do my best to make sure they are all covered.
The meeting is next Wednesday 1 June so comments by end of play on Tuesday would be great - thanks in advance…
Where to begin!?
I’ll leave the main issues aside as they I am sure they will be covered. Something that is often missed and is very important in dealing with benefits occurs with clients who lack insight into their condition or who just find it difficult to talk about their condition. Clients can bring someone with them to appointments, but Jobcentre Plus staff (and ATOS, Maximus etc) are not always aware that the accompanying person may not be able to talk about the client’s condition in front of them. This could be because it would damage the therapeutic relationship, if the accompanying person is a Care Co-ordinator (CPN or Social Worker.) It could be that it would be damaging for the client’s recovery to be made aware/reminded of exactly how ill they are. Or it could be that this conversation could cause friction leading to verbal or physical aggression from the client. Jobcentre Plus staff need to (tactfully) give an opportunity for a separate conversation to take place.
This is also why it’s so important that documentary evidence, not just oral evidence, is used for clients with mental health conditions. But having said that - the same problems can occur if psychiatrists or the Community Mental Health Team aren’t given guarantees that the evidence won’t be seen by the client. ( I once persuaded a CPN to write a letter for a tribunal on the understanding that we would state it was harmful for this to be seen by the client, but a Tribunal Judge decided that it wasn’t!)
Thanks Helen - someone else has raised the importance of jobcentre staff liaising - where the client is in agreement - with MH workers, support workers etc so I will be raising that and the points you make
Perhaps a little depressing that the RCP, in choosing to engage with DWP, appear to have potentially considerably softened their position on the assessment process which they have previously opposed as simply wrong and damaging. Now they’re taking the, admittedly not uncommon, line of trying to mitigate the damage. I understand where they’re coming from. It’s not dissimilar to the discussions around the role of Disability Rights UK or Sue Marsh’s new role. One can’t help think sometimes though that the correct response is to sit down and explain why you won’t participate. The RCP have a potentially key role in persuading politicians of the damage done by current assessment processes.
Anyway, in the meantime, I shall try and put something up on GMWRAG to see if we can get others to contribute.
A good start would be for DWP (and Medical Services, come to that) to understand that just because a mentall ill claimant isn’t rocking to and fro in the manner of an extra from ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ it doesn’t mean they’re not significantly mentally ill. Nor does not currently having an allocated CPN.
Agree with 1964. Likewise presenting as well-dressed, being able to string together coherent sentences, absence of sweating or trembling etc.
MH training is sorely needed by JCP staff (and CHDA assessors), who currently appear to believe that if someone isn’t a shambling, incoherent, unkempt basket-case, under an intensive psychiatric care regime and on the strongest medication, they have no MH issues whatsoever.
They need to be alive to a risk of relapse.
I had a sizeable cohort of people who had relapsed after being found fit for work when I started here in 2012. That’s better now because the wheels fell off and, later the effect of IM, however JCP are stunningly unaware that people aren’t necessarily “better” because they’re in a period of relative good health.
As to front line staff; a good suggestion would be for them to write a family history into any risk assessments. It’s not long since I saw someone have their first period of significant mental ill health after some pretty light touch WRA. Had the JCP staff who made the WRA referral known that there was a long history of mental ill health in the family they might have paid more attention to the “depression” diagnosis and realised their might be more grievous problems in the wings.
A good start would be for DWP (and Medical Services, come to that) to understand that just because a mentally ill claimant isn’t rocking to and fro in the manner of an extra from ‘One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest’ it doesn’t mean they’re not significantly mentally ill. Nor does not currently having an allocated CPN.
I think this is where I sense the danger in such meetings of minds. This is a structural issue that has as much to do with any disability or long-term health condition as it does mental health. By all means address with the RCP but why should that be prioritised over, for example, sensory impairment, learning disability or indeed any hidden disability and so on?
The underlying issue is one of taking a snapshot and a cultural approach which looks to find gaps in, rather than build, the story so as to have some understanding.
Taking a snapshot happens because people are poor at telling their own story or assuming what people know. It also occurs because of time constraints and problems with assessment processes themselves. Finding gaps in stories before you even know the full story is driven by the cross party belief that we have x number of scroungers etc.
That isn’t to say we shouldn’t talk to people like RCP. I am simply wondering how productive it can be in a world where not picking on one group of claimants simply results in picking on another in order to meet your targets.
Perhaps a little depressing that the RCP, in choosing to engage with DWP, appear to have potentially considerably softened their position on the assessment process which they have previously opposed as simply wrong and damaging. Now they’re taking the, admittedly not uncommon, line of trying to mitigate the damage. I understand where they’re coming from. It’s not dissimilar to the discussions around the role of Disability Rights UK or Sue Marsh’s new role. One can’t help think sometimes though that the correct response is to sit down and explain why you won’t participate. The RCP have a potentially key role in persuading politicians of the damage done by current assessment processes.
Anyway, in the meantime, I shall try and put something up on GMWRAG to see if we can get others to contribute.
Thanks for all the responses and for putting out on GMWRAG and just to be clear this is only about jobcentre frontline staff - nothing to do with the assessment process and work capability assesssment - but how work coaches etc respond to people they see in a more constructive and supportive manner whether they are on ESA/JSA or whatever. So I don’t think the RCP is changing it’s view on the assessment process as far as I’m aware…
I will update on how things progress…