[ad_1]
In late February, Inclusion Handicap opened a registry office for people who felt they were being arbitrarily treated during IV evaluations. The first results are already available.
- Since February 2020, people who see themselves as victims of intravenous arbitrariness can contact an online registry office.
- An evaluation of previous reports showed: Almost two-thirds of those who reported (64.2 percent) felt that the atmosphere of discussion in the IV evaluations was bad or very bad.
- The registration office has been activated by the coordinating organization of the organization Inclusion Handicap for the disabled.
25 victims said their conversation lasted less than 30 minutes. Some people said their reviewers had verbally abused and disrespected them. “In one particular case, the appraiser played with the dog during the conversation. In another case, the expert insulted the person in question as a witch, ”says Julien Neruda, manager of Inclusion Handicap.
SRF
These results pause reflection on Inclusion Handicap, because the charge is repeatedly raised that a few reviewers would earn a golden nose with complimentary reporting. Because: If only one or two specialized disciplines need to be clarified for an assessment, the 26 IV offices can assign these assessments directly.
After criticism grew particularly strong last year, Federal Councilor Alain Berset commissioned an external investigation. The result is still pending.
The online registration office launched by Inclusion Handicap on February 28 is aimed at affected people, but also their legal advisors and treating doctors.
We take these cases very seriously and there is a great need for action.
Many of the reporters claimed that the reviewers entered the conversation biased and that they were treated as simulators, says Julien Neruda of Inclusion Handicap. He describes the results as shocking: “We take these cases very seriously, the need for action is great.”
SRF
The results would confirm the complaints, and there is also a dependency relationship between the IV and its reviewers: “Unfortunately, it must be said that many reviewers are financially dependent on the IV. This is also supported by figures from the Federal Social Security Office. “
Based on the Freedom of Information Act, SRF analyzed these figures. These show that, since 2013, the IV offices have spent more than 190 million francs on the preparation of monodisciplinary and bi-disciplinary reports. A 10 percent group of service providers (191) received 87 percent of the total. One third of the total went to one percent of service providers (19).
Julien Neruda from Inclusion Handicap is campaigning for a new system: “We demand that in future all reviewers are randomly selected, we also ask the supervisory authority to take a look so that serious cases no longer happen.”
The supervisory authority, the Federal Social Security Office, declined to comment on the claim or the results of the online registry office. The office refers to the external study that will be published in the coming weeks. Until then, you will not comment on the subject.
