Misuse of evidence in incapacity benefit reform

I’ve come across an interesting paper titled “The misuse of evidence in incapacity benefit reform” by Steve Griffiths, a freelance consultant and researcher (and ex-welf).

It begins by noting that the idea that there are over a million people receiving incapacity benefit who are not entitled to it was a cornerstone of New Labour’s welfare reform project. Whilst not doubting that work can be good for the health, nor that people can be supported back to work, it goes on to note that the numbers have been “fatally exaggerated” whilst people with severe health needs have been treated as “invisible”.

He finds that throughout the period of the “one million myth”, there has been a failure to make connections between findings in the academic world and the reach of mental health policy development, and the ‘Reducing Dependency’ agenda of New Labour. His research also found a significant association between unemployment distribution and mortality rates (as would be expected) and also that the health issues of males claiming incapacity benefits is “simply not comparable” with the unemployed population.

In closing, in relation to ESA appeal statistics, he asks the question - “What would happen if, in the crininal justice system, half of appeals were found in favour of the appellant? It would be evidence that there was something deeply wrong”

The misuse of evidence in incapacity benefit reform”