§ The Countess of Marasked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they accept that, in the case of individuals who have been exposed to organophos-phate sheep dips and other OP pesticides and who believe that they are suffering the effects of such exposure, objective neurological tests should be conducted to establish the extent of peripheral nerve and brain damage in order to assist Benefits Agency medical service doctors in their examination of claimants for benefits.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Viscount Astor)The administration of the Benefits Agency Medical Services is a matter for Mr. Michael Bichard, the Chief Executive of the Benefits Agency. He will write to the noble Lady.Letter to the Countess of Mar from Mr. T. Lawrance, Territorial and Benefits Director, the Benefits Agency, dated 6th June 1994:
The Secretary of State for Social Security has asked Michael Bichard to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking Her Majesty's Government whether neurological tests should be conducted to assist Benefits Agency Medical Services' (BAMS) doctors in their examination of claimants for benefits. Mr. Bichard is on annual leave and I have therefore been asked to reply on his behalf.
Customers are examined by the BAMS in relation to claims for Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit (IIDB), Invalidity Benefit (IVB), Disability Living Allowance (DLA), Attendance Allowance (AA) and Severe Disablement Allowance (SDA).
The information currently obtained by the BAMS is considered sufficient to enable a decision to be made in claims to benefit where people have been exposed to organophosphate sheep dip and other OP pesticides.
With regard to IIDB, the Adjudicating Medical Authority (AMA) is responsible for reaching a decision on the diagnosis and assessment of disablement from a prescribed disease.
The information on which the AMA makes a decision includes a full medical and occupational history. The AMA will also have a report from a consultant toxicologist, consultant occupational physi-cian, or somebody of like standing, who may have decided upon a diagnostic test. These tests may include objective neurological investigations such as nerve conduction studies, CAT scans and aesthesiometry. If a 66WA test has been carried out, this will form a part of the evidence that the AMA considers, but it is not deemed necessary for a test to be obligatory in all such cases.
If the AMA is satisfied that the diagnosis is one of organophosphorus poisoning, an assessment then has to be made of the customer's disablement. The objective neurological tests described would not, in most cases, be of any value in the assessment of disablement.
When a customer is being examined in relation to a claim for IVB the examination is not made for the purpose of arriving at a particular diagnosis. This will have been given by the customer's GP on form Med 3. The purpose of the examination is to consider whether or not the customer is incapable of work. The exact nature of the medical condition is of lesser importance, although if it is occupational in origin it may influence; the doctor's opinion on the person's ability to resume: normal employment.
Similarly, in the case of DLA, AA and SDA, the examining doctor is looking at the effect of the condition on the customer's daily life, rather than the: diagnosis itself.
I hope you find this reply helpful.