Page 32 - Reforming Benefits Decision-Making

2.16 A number of disability charities and activists have called for assessments to be
62
performed by professionals with expertise in the disabilities in question.
Others have argued that the solution is to have groups of ‘experts’ with
63
different types of expertise.

2.17 We note that a number of other countries adopt some form of
multidisciplinary approach to health and disability assessments, including
66
64
65
67
Denmark, Sweden, Australia, Finland, Iceland and France.
69
68
2.18 We understand that it would not necessarily be practicable for all claimants to
be assessed by someone with specialist knowledge of their particular
condition. However, given the ongoing issues with assessment of those with
mental ill-health, neurodivergent, co-morbid, complex, fluctuating or
rare conditions, we recommend that these claimants should be assessed
70
by HCPs with specialist knowledge of their conditions. While we
appreciate that individuals often have more than one condition, we consider
that it should in most cases be possible to identify who the most appropriately

62 Work and Pensions Committee, Employment Support Allowance and Work Capability Assessments,
First Report of Session 2014-15 (HC 302, 2014), para 61; B. Geiger, A Better WCA is possible (see n.
58 above).
63 B. Geiger et al. (2018) Assessing work disability for social security benefits: international models for
the direct assessment of work capacity, Disability and Rehabilitation, 40:24, 2962-2970, p. 2966.
64 Ibid.
65 Ibid.
66 J. Sengers et al. (2020) Work capacity assessments and efforts to achieve a job match for claimants
in a social security setting: an international inventory, Disability and Rehabilitation, p.3.
67 Ibid, p.4.
68 Ibid, p.5.
69 L. Bertrand et al. (2014) Situating disability. The recognition of “disabled workers” in France 8(4)
Disability and Employability 296-281, p.270
70 We note that in other contexts there has been a move towards specialist assessment of those with
mental health conditions. In the criminal context JUSTICE has previously recommended that liaison
and diversion practitioners should screen every suspect who comes into custory to ensure accurate
identification of vulnerability and provide appropriate mental health support where necessary. The
number of cases seen by liaison and diversion services has been steadily increasing (JUSTICE, Mental
Health and Fair Trial Implementation Report (2021) para 2.16.

23