A freelance journalist/researcher H specializing in employment matters puts forward R, a friend of H’s, whom she knows has a diagnosis of manic depression (that is in WHO’s classification bi-polar affective disorder) to undertake a number of researching/writing assignments on pensions, employment relations and training. H does not inform the editor of the manic depressive diagnosis on the basis that any further assignments for any freelancers will always depend on the quality of analysis and the production of satisfactory and accurate text to monthly deadlines. Contributions used are recognised but not attributed to a specific writer. The editor is responsible for all text printed and as a consequence her/his decisions are final. Payment is to be made under the house agreement with the NUJ (National Union of Journalists) at a fixed rate per 1,000 words published. Material submitted may be shortened by the editor at his/her discretion at the editing stage to ensure an appropriate balance of relative size/importance in the bi-monthly journal which is available on subscription only.

R is an MSF member who is acceptable to the freelance branch of the NUJ. She is not eligible to join the NUJ or have joint membership since R has insufficient recent published work to submit to the union to show that a substantial proportion of her livelihood/earnings is derived from freelance journalism. R meets regularly (as an outpatient, often weekly) with a psychiatrist, is on medication to control mood swings, requiring regular blood tests and her only source of income is incapacity benefit.

The psychiatrist advises R to attend for interview and, having discussed the first trial assignment, recommends attempting-the work. Accordingly the consultant psychiatrist writes to the benefits agency explaining the advice and forwarning them that payment of say £150 - £200 may be made by a single cheque one month after publication of any satisfactory text used in the journal. There is no guarantee that the text will be used - and no payment if it is not. The work will have been undertaken over some four to five weeks - a healthy researcher might be expected to complete a single assignment in three to four days - bringing the average earnings for the period for carrying out the therapeutic work significantly below the therapeutic earnings limit.

Comment: In this particular case,the psychiatrist’s letter produced - after some delay - a letter from the benefits agency to the claimant confirming that the work to be undertaken would not result in loss of benefit for any of the weeks in which the therapeutic work undertaken on the advice of the doctor was being carried out.
Although the therapeutic work experiment could be regarded as a failure - only a single article was submitted to deadline - it could also be judged as a minor success for the claimant. She received a well needed injection of cash and possibly a valuable item for future inclusion in her cv. So it was a useful and partially successful therapeutic work treatment as a supplement to medication for the patient.

...back to Patients’ Experience