Chamber
Meeting of the Parliament 17 March 2011
17 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament
Item of business
Chronic Pain Services
I acknowledge the commitment to the issue of both Dorothy-Grace Elder and my colleague Mary Scanlon. As a pre-emptive strike, I beg a little flexibility from the Presiding Officer, because I may digress a little. He is indicating to me no, but I shall try.
My speech concerns a 53-year-old constituent of mine who has recently been in touch with me and who has been a bricklayer most of his life. He was hospitalised for abdominal pain about 18 months ago and has recently been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, for which he has at least four injections a day. His abdominal pain has increased and is now chronic. His medication comprises Pregabalin, Merbentyl, Tramadol, paracetamol and Omeprazole, which are to deal with nausea and constant pain. At least the medication will be free from 1 April.
My constituent has been unable to work since the first week in December and his doctor has signed him off from 3 March to 3 April, deeming him unfit for work. His consultant has said that he is unfit for work. However, the Department for Work and Pensions claims that he is fit for work. He completed the employment and support allowance questionnaire and then was sent, as people are, for an assessment with a private company called Atos Healthcare.
The test that is given is not only for people with chronic pain but for everybody. The information about it states:
“The assessment is likely to be different from what you would expect from your own doctor. The approved healthcare professional’s assessment is not to diagnose or discuss treatment of your illness or disability; it is to assess how it affects you and your ability to work. To find this out, the approved healthcare professional may not need to carry out a physical examination.”
In the case of my constituent, there was no physical examination. The problem for people with chronic pain and, indeed, other illnesses is that how they feel can vary from day to day. However, the questionnaire asks:
“Can you go up or down two steps without help from another person, if there is a rail to hold on to? ... Can you move from one seat to another right next to it without help from someone else? ... Can you stay in one place, either standing or sitting, for at least an hour without help from another person?”
My constituent tells me that, on a good day, the pain is similar to a bad stitch in his side but that, on a bad day, he simply does not get out of bed. He states that there are more bad days than good and that they occur randomly, and that he sleeps only a little through the night. None of that kind of information is exposed in the test for the DWP. To compound the problem, even the assessor told my constituent that the system is unfair. He also said that his claim would be rejected—it was and he was awarded no points—but that his appeal would be successful. I wait to see whether it will be.
In the meantime, my constituent is worn out and disgusted and upset that, after all his years of working and now having pain that gives him little respite, he is being rubber-stamped as—I think that the term is apposite today—a benefit scrounger, when he is anything but.
I thought that it was important to bring that issue to the chamber because, although it is adjacent to the issue of the treatment of chronic pain, it is another unfairness for people who have chronic pain.
12:44
My speech concerns a 53-year-old constituent of mine who has recently been in touch with me and who has been a bricklayer most of his life. He was hospitalised for abdominal pain about 18 months ago and has recently been diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, for which he has at least four injections a day. His abdominal pain has increased and is now chronic. His medication comprises Pregabalin, Merbentyl, Tramadol, paracetamol and Omeprazole, which are to deal with nausea and constant pain. At least the medication will be free from 1 April.
My constituent has been unable to work since the first week in December and his doctor has signed him off from 3 March to 3 April, deeming him unfit for work. His consultant has said that he is unfit for work. However, the Department for Work and Pensions claims that he is fit for work. He completed the employment and support allowance questionnaire and then was sent, as people are, for an assessment with a private company called Atos Healthcare.
The test that is given is not only for people with chronic pain but for everybody. The information about it states:
“The assessment is likely to be different from what you would expect from your own doctor. The approved healthcare professional’s assessment is not to diagnose or discuss treatment of your illness or disability; it is to assess how it affects you and your ability to work. To find this out, the approved healthcare professional may not need to carry out a physical examination.”
In the case of my constituent, there was no physical examination. The problem for people with chronic pain and, indeed, other illnesses is that how they feel can vary from day to day. However, the questionnaire asks:
“Can you go up or down two steps without help from another person, if there is a rail to hold on to? ... Can you move from one seat to another right next to it without help from someone else? ... Can you stay in one place, either standing or sitting, for at least an hour without help from another person?”
My constituent tells me that, on a good day, the pain is similar to a bad stitch in his side but that, on a bad day, he simply does not get out of bed. He states that there are more bad days than good and that they occur randomly, and that he sleeps only a little through the night. None of that kind of information is exposed in the test for the DWP. To compound the problem, even the assessor told my constituent that the system is unfair. He also said that his claim would be rejected—it was and he was awarded no points—but that his appeal would be successful. I wait to see whether it will be.
In the meantime, my constituent is worn out and disgusted and upset that, after all his years of working and now having pain that gives him little respite, he is being rubber-stamped as—I think that the term is apposite today—a benefit scrounger, when he is anything but.
I thought that it was important to bring that issue to the chamber because, although it is adjacent to the issue of the treatment of chronic pain, it is another unfairness for people who have chronic pain.
12:44
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan)
SNP
The next item of business is a members’ business debate on motion S3M-7853, in the name of Mary Scanlon, on chronic pain services in Scotland. The debate wil...
Mary Scanlon (Highlands and Islands) (Con)
Con
The previous debate on chronic pain in the Parliament was secured by Dorothy-Grace Elder in February 2002. Nine years on, now is a good time to take stock of...
Christine Grahame (South of Scotland) (SNP)
SNP
I acknowledge the commitment to the issue of both Dorothy-Grace Elder and my colleague Mary Scanlon. As a pre-emptive strike, I beg a little flexibility from...
Cathie Craigie (Cumbernauld and Kilsyth) (Lab)
Lab
I am grateful for the opportunity to speak in the debate. I thank Mary Scanlon for bringing the subject to the chamber and I acknowledge her long involvement...
Jamie Stone (Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross) (LD)
LD
It is a pleasure to join the debate. I congratulate Mary Scanlon on her motion and I salute the work that she has done with her cross-party group on chronic ...
Mary Scanlon
Con
I should bring some balance to the debate. Having quoted Dorothy-Grace Elder saying that NHS Highland was a disgrace in 2002, I should also say that we now h...
Jamie Stone
LD
The intervention is fair and I accept the point entirely. I do not wish to denigrate NHS Highland; I simply wish to question its policy decision on the futur...
Nanette Milne (North East Scotland) (Con)
Con
I apologise to you, Presiding Officer, and to colleagues for not being able to stay for the whole debate. I have commitments elsewhere in the building.Mary S...
Ian McKee (Lothians) (SNP)
SNP
I congratulate Mary Scanlon on obtaining this members’ business debate. It is, perhaps, the last time that I will be able to contribute to parliamentary proc...
Mary Scanlon
Con
I asked for an audit to be carried out across Scotland to see whether we could justify having here in Scotland a specialised service similar to that which ex...
Ian McKee
SNP
Knowledge of the problem that faces us can never be ignored. Therefore, an audit of chronic pain and other conditions is desirable.Although I do not know off...
The Deputy Presiding Officer
SNP
Thank you, Dr McKee.13:00
Rhoda Grant (Highlands and Islands) (Lab)
Lab
I congratulate Mary Scanlon on securing the debate. She was right to pay tribute to Dorothy-Grace Elder, but Mary has taken up the role of being an advocate ...
The Minister for Public Health and Sport (Shona Robison)
SNP
I congratulate Mary Scanlon on securing a debate on such an important topic as chronic pain. The issue has interested her since the establishment of the Parl...
Mary Scanlon
Con
The royal college and others have said that there is no clear referral pathway in Scotland, apart from through the managed clinical network in Glasgow. Consu...
Shona Robison
SNP
Mary Scanlon’s point about the patient pathway is important. The solution is a managed clinical network. Good evidence is emerging from Glasgow on the benefi...