IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/socpsy/v66y2020i2p136-149.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do welfare benefit reassessments of people with mental health conditions lead to worse mental health? A prospective cohort study

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Stuart
  • Sanchika Campbell
  • Beatrice Osumili
  • Emily J Robinson
  • Mary Frost-Gaskin
  • Richard Pacitti
  • Paul McCrone
  • Claire Henderson

Abstract

Background: There have been cases of suicide following the Work Capability Assessment (WCA), a questionnaire and interview for those claiming benefits due to ill health or disability in the United Kingdom. Aims: To examine whether experiencing problems with welfare benefits, including WCA, among people with pre-existing mental health conditions was associated with poorer mental health and wellbeing and increased health service use and costs. Methods: A prospective cohort study of an exposed group ( n  = 42) currently seeking help from a Benefits Advice Service in London and a control group ( n  = 45) who had recently received advice from the same service. Questionnaires at baseline and 3-, 6- and 12-month follow-ups. Results: The exposed group had higher mean scores for anxiety ( p  = .008) and depression ( p  = .016) at baseline and the control group higher mean scores for wellbeing at baseline ( p  = .034) and 12 months ( p  = .035). However, loss to follow-up makes overall results difficult to interpret. The control group had higher incomes throughout the study, particularly at the 12-month follow-up ( p  = .004), but the differences could have been accounted for by other factors. Health service costs were skewed by a few participants who used day-care services intensively or had inpatient stays. Over the study period the proportion of exposed participants engaged in benefits reassessment ranged from 50% to 88%, and 40% to 76% of controls. Conclusion: The hardship of living with financial insecurity and a mental health condition made it difficult for our participants to sustain involvement in a 12-month study and the frequency of benefit reviews meant that the experiences of our controls were similar to our exposed group. These limitations limit interpretation but confirm the relevance of our research. The control data raise the question of whether people with mental health conditions are being disproportionately reassessed.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Stuart & Sanchika Campbell & Beatrice Osumili & Emily J Robinson & Mary Frost-Gaskin & Richard Pacitti & Paul McCrone & Claire Henderson, 2020. "Do welfare benefit reassessments of people with mental health conditions lead to worse mental health? A prospective cohort study," International Journal of Social Psychiatry, , vol. 66(2), pages 136-149, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:66:y:2020:i:2:p:136-149
    DOI: 10.1177/0020764019888955
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0020764019888955
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0020764019888955?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:socpsy:v:66:y:2020:i:2:p:136-149. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.