ALT https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychiatry/articles/10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1065812/full Psychiatry, 16 February 2023 Therapies for obsessive-compulsive disorder: Current state of the art and perspectives for approaching treatment-resistant patients 2. 1st-line treatment Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) with exposure & response prevention (E/RP) is one of the first-line evidence-based treatments for OCD...several meta-analyses have found a significant reduction of OCD symptoms after a psychotherapy including E/RP, with 42-52% of patients achieving symptom remission ...results should be interpreted considering potential biases, such as the exclusion from the CBT trials of patients with comorbidities or the most severe cases of OCD 3. 2nd-line treatment Taking for granted the heterogeneity in the definition of response criteria in the literature, a recent review on pharmacotherapeutic strategies in OCD suggests that only up to 50% of patients respond to SSRIs

ALT https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010440X22000487#bb0595 Science Direct Comprehensive Psychiatry Volume 118, October 2022, 152342 The global assessment of OCD A recent meta-analysis confirmed the previous observation: at least one in ten patients with OCD attempts suicide during their lifetime, while nearly half of individuals with OCD have suicidal ideation.

ALT https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251107/6491.pdf The Draft Social Security (Incapacity for Work) (General) Amendment Regulations 2003 Ministers referred a draft amendment to Regulation 27 of the Social Security (Incapacity for Work)(General) Regulations 1995...[that] would have reversed the effect of the Court of Appeal Judgment in Howker & the Secretary of State for Work & Pensions & the Social Security Advisory Committee which restored the provision allowing people to be treated as incapable of work if there is a substantial risk to the health of any person if they are found capable of work In May 2003 the Committee recommended that no change be made for the present...it considered that it had seen no evidence of any inappropriate broadening of the criteria leading to benefits being paid in "undeserving" cases The Government has decided to withdraw the proposal at the present time

ALT https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/work-capability-assessment-activities-and-descriptors/work-capability-assessment-activities-and-descriptors GOV.UK Work Capability Assessment: activities and descriptors 22 Nov 2023 Firstly, we are considering whether to amend the LCWRA substantial risk definition to reflect that this would not apply where a person could take part in tailored or a minimal level of work preparation activity &/or where reasonable adjustments could be put in place to enable that person to engage with work preparation. This change would represent an opportunity to better support claimants with challenging barriers to ensure they are helped and signposted to access provision relevant to their personal circumstances.

ALT https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/164/work-and-pensions-committee/publications/3/correspondence/ https://committees.parliament.uk/publications/55459/standard/pdf/ 13 October 2026 Dear Debbie, Thank you for your letter of 17 September and for the Committee's continued engagement with the Timms Review. We welcome the thoughtful and constructive challenge that the Committee has provided throughout this process. The steering group has heard feedback through Shaping Recommendations Workshops & Roundtables which will directly inform how the recommendations are refined before the final report is presented to the Secretary of State. No final decisions have been taken on future entitlement arrangements, including for people who currently receive support through the Substantial Risk provisions. Yours sincerely, Rt Hon. Sir Stephen Timms MP Minister for Social Security & Disability

ALT https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263217809_ New_Labour_the_market_state_and_the_end_of_welfare New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare Jonathan Rutherford There is no evidence to suggest that impoverishing people who are ill will prompt them into longer-term employment, and this is particularly true for those with mental health problems. In 2006 the DWP published a report on the impact of the Pathways to Work pilots on people with mental health problems. It concluded that: 'the estimated impact of the policy on the outcomes of interest for those who report having a mental illness (as a single health condition) is never statistically different from zero at conventional levels'. The future looks bleak for those who have 'symptoms without diseases', or mental health conditions, and who cannot demonstrate that their illness has an 'objective medical pathology'.

ALT https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263217809_New_Labour_the_market_state_and_the_end_of_welfare New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare July 2007 Jonathan Rutherford

ALT https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263217809_New_Labour_the_market_state_and_the_end_of_welfare New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare July 2007 Jonathan Rutherford

ALT https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263217809_New_Labour_the_market_state_and_the_end_of_welfare New Labour, the market state, and the end of welfare July 2007 Jonathan Rutherford

ALT https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/income-related-benefits-estimates-of-take-up-financial-year-ending-2025/income-related-benefits-estimates-of-take-up-financial-year-ending-2025 Income-related benefits: estimates of take-up: financial year ending 2025 22 Oct 2026 UC (or equivalent benefits) The estimates show that: caseload: up to 2.6 million families who were entitled to receive UC (or equivalent benefits) did not claim in FYE 2025 expenditure: up to £12.7 billion of available UC expenditure went unclaimed in FYE 2025 on average, this amounted to around £4,700 per year for each family entitled to receive UC who did not claim the benefit Eurofound 2015 identifies the following reasons for non-take-up: 'lack of awareness or misperceptions about entitlement or application procedures' 'complexity of the application procedure or lack of resources such as time & capabilities to navigate the system' 'stigma, perceived lack of need, pride & lack of trust in institutions'