Medical Evidence

Jason

Although it may sound counter intuitive, ESA does not directly test a claimants ability to work, so statements from a GP, etc. about why they count tend to be of little value. ESA awards are made because the claimant meets specific criteria so the ideal letter explains how the claimants meets those criteria and why.

Your biggest problem will be whether the doctor can extrapolate your conditions into the activity, for example I would a GP to be able to offer meaningful comment about the problems someone with OCD would have, but they may not be able to do so if you lack "energy and motivation".

One option is to give your GP a copy of the Descriptors with the points removed and ask them to indicate which one they think would apply to you and add a comment as to why.

Gordon

Jason

ESA has very specific criteria that the claimant must show that they meet in order to receive an award.

The further that your GP strays from those criteria in describing your problems, the less value or weight their comments will have with those assessing you, so as an example at one extreme; your GP saying that you are not fit for work will carry no weight whatsoever as it gives no indication of how you meet the ESA Descriptors.

At the other extreme, if they were to say that A cannot raise there hands to their chest, that this is because of joint erosion in their shoulders and elbows caused by Osteoarthritis, attempting this causes extreme pain in the joint that cannot adequately be addressed with pain killer, then this would be something that I would expect to significantly help a claim as it directly addresses an ESA Descriptor and explains why the claimant would have problems completing it.

The point I was making with the example of someone with OCD is that it is reasonable for the GP to extrapolate what impact their OCD rituals might have on their ability to perform certain functions. I think it unlikely that the would be able to draw similar conclusions for someone who lacks energy and motivation or even depression, nor do I think that it is a natural conclusion that someone with these problems would be unable to work, I can certainly recall periods of my life where I had these symptoms and was working full time. So any letter that made use of these terms would at best be of limited value in supporting a claim.

Now this is of course an ideal view of the world and it may be that your GP would not write these things even if they were fully aware of your issues, in which case it may be a case of accepting what they will write, although you should consider the point that a poorly worded GP letter can do more damage than no letter at all.

Gordon

Jason

It strikes me that rather than discussing with us what your GP might or might not write for you , you would actually be better served by sitting down with them and asking what they would be willing to write.

Reliably is not specifically defined but you should take it as meaning that you would need to complete an activity on at least 50% of the occasions that you attempt it, you may be able to argue that the success rate should actually be higher, if you look at the dictionary definition it uses words such as consistent, dependable.

Gordon