Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
Thank you, BMJ, for alerting thousands of doctors to the latest
proposal from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [1]: to remove
benefits from ‘alcoholics’ so they ‘need to get sober, get their life back
and get back to work’. [2] The Government is also going to stimulate some
new Research on using such financial penalties to ‘help’ return suitably
reformed drinkers back into productive workers.
An obvious Feasibility Study comes to mind. There are some 646 people
of working age sitting in Parliament, mostly males. Assuming they are no
more prone to alcohol dependence than their constituents (inspite of the
cheap, long hours workplace availability of alcohol in Westminster) about
50 will currently use alcohol in a disordered, disabling way and another
50 will have a history of similar problems. The alcohol disorders among
Members of Parliament will range from episodic loss of control over their
pathological drinking, to chronic and overwhelming dependence. Now a busy
Job Centre Plus might assess 646 customers in one week, so we could easily
ask such Department of Work and Pensions staff to assess all the MPs for a
history of ‘alcoholism’ so they can ‘get back to work’. Those judged to be
unfit for work due to alcohol would lose their income, accommodation and
expenses until they sobered up to the satisfaction of those employment
advisers. In the words of the Secretary of State, how many of his 100 or
so colleagues will easily ‘conquer their problems’? [2]
1. O’Dowd A. Doctors warn government against removing benefits from
alcoholics who refuse treatment. BMJ 2009; 338: 971.
2. Department for Work and Pensions. Purnell: welfare reform is about
putting families first. DWP Press Release, 14 April 2009.
Competing interests:
Some involvement in alcohol research over three decades.
Feasibility Study
Thank you, BMJ, for alerting thousands of doctors to the latest
proposal from the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [1]: to remove
benefits from ‘alcoholics’ so they ‘need to get sober, get their life back
and get back to work’. [2] The Government is also going to stimulate some
new Research on using such financial penalties to ‘help’ return suitably
reformed drinkers back into productive workers.
An obvious Feasibility Study comes to mind. There are some 646 people
of working age sitting in Parliament, mostly males. Assuming they are no
more prone to alcohol dependence than their constituents (inspite of the
cheap, long hours workplace availability of alcohol in Westminster) about
50 will currently use alcohol in a disordered, disabling way and another
50 will have a history of similar problems. The alcohol disorders among
Members of Parliament will range from episodic loss of control over their
pathological drinking, to chronic and overwhelming dependence. Now a busy
Job Centre Plus might assess 646 customers in one week, so we could easily
ask such Department of Work and Pensions staff to assess all the MPs for a
history of ‘alcoholism’ so they can ‘get back to work’. Those judged to be
unfit for work due to alcohol would lose their income, accommodation and
expenses until they sobered up to the satisfaction of those employment
advisers. In the words of the Secretary of State, how many of his 100 or
so colleagues will easily ‘conquer their problems’? [2]
1. O’Dowd A. Doctors warn government against removing benefits from
alcoholics who refuse treatment. BMJ 2009; 338: 971.
2. Department for Work and Pensions. Purnell: welfare reform is about
putting families first. DWP Press Release, 14 April 2009.
Competing interests:
Some involvement in alcohol research over three decades.
Competing interests: No competing interests