“What kind of 'policy' cannot recognise that somebody is seriously ill & dying? As a doctor, I say this is barbaric.”
Campaigners have expressed outrage at the outcome of an internal Department for Work and Pensions review which found that policy was “followed” in the case of Stephen Smith, a man who was denied benefits while on his deathbed.
Smith, 64, had a number of serious illnesses including obstructive pulmonary disease, osteoarthritis, an enlarged prostate, and he relied on a colostomy bag.
In the months leading up to his death, he weighed just 38 kg and could not walk for more than 20 metres without becoming short of breath and feeling pain – and yet he was deemed fit for work and his employment support allowance was stopped.
The government overturned the decision in February, but two months later in April, Smith died and the £4,000 that was returned to him was used to pay for his funeral.
Following his death, DWP Secretary Amber Rudd ordered an internal review into his case. In a statement, the DWP explained that “policy guidance was followed”, but admitted that “there were crucial safeguarding opportunities which were missed by the department.”
“The review has identified areas where we need to change our policy and we will be implementing these changes to ensure our most vulnerable claimants are protected,” the DWP said in a statement.
“The department will be working at pace to ensure that these are embedded and that vulnerable claimants are receiving the best possible support from the department. I am adamant that we will learn important lessons from this tragic case and make changes to protect people like Mr Smith in future.”
The outcome has been met with disdain by both campaigners and MPs who claim an internal review is not good enough.
Frank Field, the MP for Birkenhead, Smith’s constituency, said that the review did not do enough to address the loss of a life.
“What kind of policy guidance is it that fails to recognise that somebody is seriously ill and dying? This letter heavily disguises the fact that we’re talking about a man who lost his life, not a package that got lost within the DWP.
“It sums up much of what’s wrong with the DWP, which is apparently very short on human sympathy,” he said.
Angela Rayner, the Labour MP for Ashton-under-Lyne, Droylsden and Failsworth, added: “If this doesn’t make you want to see the back of this Tory Government then I don’t know what will.”
Palliative care doctor Rachel Clarke said: “What kind of ‘policy’ cannot recognise that somebody is seriously ill & dying? As a doctor, I say this is barbaric.”
Meka Beresford is a freelance journalist. Follow her on Twitter.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
5 Responses to “Outrage as DWP says correct policy was followed in denying dying man benefits”
Joe
There is a photo of this poor man which he gave consent to be published before his death. Please don’t erase him from his own story.
nhsgp
How can socialist support the welfare state when public sector workers do this to people?
How can you support an organisation that fiddles the accounts and is 10 trillion in the red?
That causes austerity.
That taxes people 220 bn with no services.
That’s the direct cause of wealth inequality where the workers are denied their wealth, and dumped into debt.
Patrick Newman
nhsgp – I am gagging to read your take on the Mark Fisher incident.
Tom Sacold
From my experience from working as a volunteer for a charity in this area, in almost all cases it is badly filled in forms resulting from not reading the information leaflets that results in the suspension of benefits.
The classic case being the question on preparing a meal. From the supporting information it is clear that this does not mean taking a prepared meal out of the freezer and putting it in the microwave. It means peeling potatoes and using a grill etc. ie the physical activity of food preparation. Many people simply do not read the information and answer Yes when they should tick No. This then has to be dealt with on appeal, which is a waste of time and money and the cause of much stress for the person involved.
Dave Lawrence
If people want to join the group we are getting a petition together to challenge UC. Petition post is pinned in announcements at top of our page……….We are a relatively new group – 7 weeks old with 4350 members and are here to share news, share stories, get information and advice and combat issues with the Universal Credit system. Come join us and vent if you wish but politeness is requested at all times. Currently a petition is being formulated and we would welcome views on what needs to change. …Issues with Universal Credit, news, views, information, support or just a rant…….come join us…..https://www.facebook.com/groups/557907344617657/?ref=group_header