24/01/2012

Rejecting SCOPE’s Personal Independence Payment (PIP) assessment based on the social model saying  it would  ‘cause barriers and cost’ Lord Freud, Government Spokesperson, Department for Work and Pensions said that the government, ‘had gone for the biopsychosocial model’ and that the social model was ‘intrusive and costly assessment, putting significant cost burdens on the state’.
Disabled people have fought long and hard for the social model of disability to be used throughout government and society. The social model acknowledges the attitudinal, physical and institutional barriers to disabled people’s independence. SCOPE’s PIP assessment is supported by many disabled people’s organisations. Inclusion London disagrees with Lord Freud, that the social model is ‘superficially attractive’ and questions whether disabled people would find this type of assessment ‘intrusive’ as Lord Freud claims. 
The biopsychosocial model claims that a disease or disorder is explained through biological, psychological, and social factors. Interestingly, it is a model which has been adopted by Unum, who the government consulted on regarding Welfare Reform. Unum provides insurance and rehabilitation services.
Sources for this article include:
www.publications.parliament.uk
www.biology-online.org/dictionary
www.ask.unum.co.uk/blog
www.scope.org.uk/campaigns