mentioning on esa50 the process increased distress

Hi

If I mention on the esa50 that the arrival of the form and filling it in has caused my anxiety and depression to rocket, resulting in me being more irritable and snappy and demanding to people, would this cause maximus to penalise me in any way?

That seems a bit odd. I've read on some DWP guidance about unacceptable claimant behaviour that anger issues are less likely to have f to f due to health and safety risks and causing unnecessary harm to claimants. If a consultant can explain how the anger affects someone why drag them in to deliberately provoke them?

Sorry, there's a couple more things on this that I wanted to say. I've been lucky with ESA and PIP as I've never had a medical - I've always had very strong medical evidence and my MP has been willing to intervene if necessary. According to the Filework Guidelines for ESA then someone to whom a medical would cause severe distress(psychotic disorder is given as one of the examples) should not be called in if the evidence is enough. If they call someone with severe mental health problems who will see it as threatening/persecutory and they become very aggressive then they are causing unnecessary harm to that person and that is way off the mark.

Gordon wrote: Chrissy

We have seen for PIP, I know this is ESA, issues tending towards anger tend to make a face to face more likely and one at the Assessment Providers offices more likely.

On the other hand these types of issues are confirmation of problems in the mental health half of the ESA activities and it could be important to mention them.

On balance it is usually best to mention things if for no other reason that if you don't then they can't be considered.

Gordon

Hi Gordon
Thanks for your speedy reply.
I've had a think about this and although I genuinely believe I deserve to remain in the support group, under reulation 35, as the HCP's have been given different guidelines, I am not sure if they can make me take SSRI's or any other workplace reasonable adjustment to mitigate the risk, which, in my case, would be worsened mental health, and worsened inwardly turned fits of rage, and I hate to say it, but I dont even know if those fits of rage could turn outwards and be a risk to others.
The other very relevant thing is loss of money causing me to lose my home. As a vulnerable adult, given our council's housing allocation policy, I am not sure I would be eligible for a social flat, given my personal circumstances, which are a different non-benefit related issue unto themselves, but could mean that the council are not obliged to offer me a home.
I am concerned that maximus or the Cheddar Centre as I call them CHDA, may just think I just want to stay in the support group for the extra money, even though loss of money is listed as a possible risk factor in making someone more ill.