Well enough to work?

Dr. Sutton's response is helpful and the possible conflicts she
discusses, between satisfying the employer, Atos, and the duty to give the
most honest opinion for the benefit of the DWP decision-maker, are
important. However, I wrote on the ethics of advice and emphasised
heavily that that was all I was addressing. I have not changed my mind: I
continue to believe that ethically "the first duty of the assessor is to
supply, with the consent of the claimant, honest advice to the DWP on the
most likely correct numerical score for the statutory descriptors in the
test". If a particular Health Care Professional (HCP - doctor, nurse or
physiotherapist) should give a less than honest opinion in the belief that
this will please the employer, then I would say that is unethical. Duties
of employment do not override duties to give honest, independent opinions,
either when there is a direct duty of care or when there is not.

Harrington, in the report previously cited, says that about 40% of
DWP decisions assessing the claimant as capable of work (as defined in the
legislation), if they go to appeal, are set aside. This suggests to many
that the original scoring and decision-making could be better.