A Load of T'Waddell & Aylward

Professor Aylward claims many people are ill because there are gains to be had for being ill. He thinks this explains why people stay on benefits and adopt the ‘sick role’.  That twaddle didn’t have much credence when it was first mooted decades ago.

This is the psychological side of the biopsychosocial model. Well, anybody who has studied psychology, as I have, know there’s hundreds of research studies being published every day, so it wouldn’t be difficult to find one to fit your agenda or the government’s – in this case, a sinister one to justify savage cuts to disability benefits, especially to those with illnesses and sicknesses which Aylward, Waddell et al don’t consider to be ‘diseases’. But anybody with only the most rudimentary grasp of psychology knows that psychological factors can affect the physical; that if you have a disease or illness, the symptoms can be affected by external factors, stress, depression etc.  But you can’t go from stating psychological factors play a part to then saying that psychological is all there is. This just displays a lack of the most basic scientific logic and is shoddy in the extreme.

But there’s also something warped about stating that sick people stand to gain from financial security and thus need to be ‘disincentivised’ (horrid word); that somehow benefiting or needing a financial safety net is wrong and that sick people should somehow choose to put themselves at financial risk in preference.  This isn’t peculiar to ill people; everyone derives benefits from being financially better off.  We see the same sort of language being bandied about all people on benefits, sick or the ‘fit’ unemployed.  We hear the term ‘welfare dependent’. Let’s get one thing clear. Everyone is financially dependent. Everyone needs money to buy the basics to survive.  How is it that we never hear about the tax-break dependent?  Or the bonus-dependent?  It is only the poor who are blamed for being ‘dependent’ on something that is a requirement for us all to survive.  Money. And enough of it. 

 So it's time to name the elephant in the room.

Forced Work

It isn’t work people are afraid of, if they are able to do some, it’s the idea of being forced.  Let’s substitute work for sex, for a moment. Sex is supposed to be something freely given, an expression of love or lust between two people.  For others, perhaps those who’ve been in a relationship a long time, the spark may have disappeared and partners may feel it a bit of a tedious duty, like others feel about having been in their job for too long, but nevertheless, they go through the motions, for other benefits.  Those benefits in a marriage, could be for security, safety, companionship.  The same could be said of work, the job may be stale, but there are benefits such as security, companionship, and of course, there may be financial benefits.  Maybe there aren’t, maybe the money isn’t worth it, just as in the relationship, maybe it is dead, and time to move on. 

But none of these cross a line.  But forced work, is no difference to forced sex. Forced sex has a name. Rape.  If a person doesn’t consent to have sex, then it is force.  The raped person will feel abused, worthless, guilt, shame, devalued, angry, powerless. Long term effects may include anxiety attacks, panic attacks, agoraphobia, depression, suicidal thoughts and attempts. This is what happens when people lose control of their lives, lose their autonomy, their right to say who they sleep with and when.  It is now agreed that in a civilised society that this should be a person’s right, it affords dignity, self-worth and self-respect. But hang on: shouldn’t this apply to work as well?  Work should be a choice: something that affords dignity, self-worth and self-respect, shouldn’t it? We’ve all heard the government rhetoric but on the sly they are using compulsion and force.  They aren’t the stereotype rapists who jump at you and overpower you in a dark alley. They are much too clever. They use subtle language, blackmail, power and authority to get you into bed against your will.  The results are the same and they are devastating. They take away your autonomy, your ability to act freely, your capacity for choice, your capacity for creativity, your capacity to make a simple decision.  They incapacitate you, in fact.