AIBU to consider legal action after dismissal for long-term sickness?

You’re not reading/haven’t read all of my comments where I have stated

”I also previously stated that if her manager didn’t know it was harm OCD, once he/she was advised that’s what it was (by Occ health) then she should act on their advice that would be that OP is not a risk.” - which implies I agree that it is fine for the manager to take advice in the first place.

I have many times highlighted I am commenting on the situation of OP and others in general where they have OCD and no other diagnosed conditions. So comments about other diagnoses are moot.

Which part am I not reading properly? I'm saying OCD as a diagnosis for most people doesn't immediately mean harm OCD first of all. Second of all having OCD doesn't rule out other diagnoses OR just being a bad person who hates Janet who sits next to you at work.

Whatever you're saying that I'm not getting can you please explain.

Again, you’re not reading properly. I also know this.

It's not her manager who made the decision, it's HR. Based on her inability to do her job. Her manager was right to flag, she had no choice, HR have decided she can't fulfil terms of employment

I know this and again, see my last comment to Velumental.

I meant in general never tell anyone. Because, like others have proven on here there’s no attempt at understanding.

I also previously stated that if her manager didn’t know it was harm OCD, once he/she was advised that’s what it was (by Occ health) then she should act on their advice that would be that OP is not a risk.

But she didn't tell her boss she had OCD she told her she was having thoughts of harming colleagues.

Her manager, when she disclosed harmful thoughts towards a colleague. Had absolutely no way to know this. What if she'd shrugged and said meh, OCD incapable of harm. But actually she was having a psychotic episode and stabbed Janet in the eye? Then on her defense said 'i told Margaret in a lucid moment I intended to stab Janet in her stupid face, she didn't act on it so I had no option but to go ahead'

Her manager is not a MH professional

I think, as others have said, the lesson learned from this thread is never to tell anyone you suffer from harm OCD.

Read my previous comments. They have said OCD and no other diagnosed disorder.

Oh, FGS, why can’t people read? I have previously said those with OCD and no other diagnosed conditions are less likely to harm someone than the person sat next to them who hasn’t voiced intrusive thoughts to their manager. The fact they have told someone about the intrusive thoughts is irrelevant if they’re diagnosed with OCD.

I have also noted previously that it it likely to be the compulsions, anxiety and distress that are causing her to not be able to do her job. Though obviously we don’t know exactly as it hasn’t been disclosed by OP what Occ Health actually said.

I don’t know the exact figures but it is negligible that someone with OCD will also have a personality disorder that makes them also capable of wanting to harm someone. That’s because OCD is ego dystonic and personality disorders, like sociopathy for example, are ego syntonic, as has been explained previously.

Maybe every person who jokes they could strangle their colleague today should be escorted off their work premises too

I've worked in some workplaces that have inappropriate humour but joking about strangling colleagues is not normal and should always result in disciplinary action.

Usually remain

Not always

Also her manager wasn't remotely able to decide whether there were other co.morbid conditions at play alongside the OCD. What if OP had OCD and was having a psychotic episode with undiagnosed schizophrenia alongside?

The only safe thing to do is escalate for MH help as manager did

@PhoebeBuffay1234
You actually cannot say patients with OCD are incapable of harming someone. Many people with ocd have other mental health problems, for instance- the co-existent pathology could potentially cause risky behaviour. Or they could behave entirely out of character (possibly on a single occasion) under the influence of drink and/or illicit substances.

I suspect that any reputable psychiatrist or psychologist would say the same- very low risk, perhaps, but not zero risk. Zero risk does not exist, for anyone.

in any case, OP’s manager, when told this information- and as a lay person- had no choice but to act and escalate it appropriately. Even if you were her manager and ‘knew” she was not a risk, I’m sure presented with an employee struggling with mental health problems and admitting to intrusive thoughts of harming others (however unlikely you thought it would be that they would act in them), you would not ignore it and hope it all worked out, surely? I’d have thought you’d have to escalate that.

we also don’t know that this (the employer being aware of her thoughts re harming others) is the reason for her dismissal. It would seem this was made on the back of an occupational health report commissioned after 8 months + absence. A report which stated that the professional assessment of the OH specialist was that she was currently unfit for work and unlikely to be so for the foreseeable future. I would be surprised if the OH doctor had not sought information from OP’s psychiatrist- and quite possibly sought their opinion on her ability to return to work/likely timescales- as part of their assessment (they usually do- as a specialist I am often asked for information and/or opinion by occupational health). I can’t say whether OH are right, or not, but OP’s manager is hardly in a position to override the assessment and let her come back to work against advice. Again, whether or not all the correct procedures have been followed, I can’t comment on and op should seek legal advice.

Where does it say They’re less likely to harm someone than person sat next to then without OCD

it does say These intrusive thoughts should not be interpreted as true reflections of someone's internal state or intentions. It is up to qualified mental health professionals to assess potential risks for actual physical harm or suicidal ideation in order to provide appropriate intervention and care.

They’re less likely to harm someone than person sat next to then without OCD. The fact they have vocalised the thoughts is by the by.

From: adaa.org/learn-from-us/from-the-experts/blog-posts/consumer/harm-ocd-vs-being-dangerous

It is important to note that Harm OCD does not indicate a risk of carrying out actual physical harm. While the thoughts associated with Harm OCD can be disturbing and distressing, they usually remain within the realm of ego-dystonic thoughts -- meaning they are contrary to one's own values, beliefs, and sense of self. These intrusive thoughts should not be interpreted as true reflections of someone's internal state or intentions. It is up to qualified mental health professionals to assess potential risks for actual physical harm or suicidal ideation in order to provide appropriate intervention and care.

People who are truly at risk of harm to others typically find pleasure in the thoughts and these thoughts are ego-syntonic, meaning the thoughts align with the individual’s sense of self. Individuals who feel unmanageable anger and find it difficult to resist acting on aggressive impulses, people who have a history of having acted out violently or sexually either while sober or under the influence of a substance, people who hear voices, see or hear things that others don’t or feel people are out to get them are all situations in which one should be concerned

So someone who wanted to or was likely to act on these thoughts would NOT be diagnosed with OCD. And anyone who has been assesed by a qualified medical professional and diagnosed with OCD is not a risk.

@bigboykitty

Waiting for what you would say / do if a member of your team (who you knew had OCD) expressed violent thoughts involving a knife to other team members?

Can someone who is making these claims that people with OCD are incapable of harming anyone point to the evidence which states that nobody with OCD has ever committed a violent crime? No? Didn’t think so.

As for the so called psychiatrist with a knife, he sounds more like a dangerous fettishist who gets a kick out of having a knife held to his throat. Creepy fucker.

Plenty of people who have certain thoughts don’t actually carry them out. That doesn’t mean people shouldn’t take those thoughts seriously, to not do so is dangerous. Just because there is so called evidence that on the whole people who have harmful thoughts don’t commit harm doesn’t mean it never happens or that it’s impossible. Neither does it mean that those who express concern for their own safety should be tolerant because it has a diagnosis.

Plenty of people have suicidal thoughts for instance and never go through with completing the actual act. Should we ignore them? Absolutely not. And neither would anyone ever advocate doing so.

In the same way stating that someone having thoughts of harming others with a knife should just be ignored because there’s some evidence which suggests that they’re not going to carry it out is completely unreasonable. Just because there is evidence that on the whole people don’t carry out harmful thoughts, there is 0 evidence that this has never happened. As soon as someone expresses a desire to harm others this needs to be taken seriously. A diagnosis does not negate that.

If I’ve read this correctly OP, you’re saying that OH said you were not fit to return to work due to ‘OCD taking up a lot of your day’. In your assessment, what have you said that’s caused them to come to that conclusion? If that’s true, then genuinely you don’t sound well enough to return to work. You’ve also said you want to return on part time hours which indicates you too might not be sure you’re well enough?

It sounds as though your employer has been very understanding so far. They’ve kept your role for 7 months and have been supportive. If it’s a big company they’ll have taken advice and will absolutely know the law. They can only go by what Occupational Health is telling them. From what I can see, the only thing they should have done was let you have a union rep at the meeting.

This, especially with several highly publicised incidents of people with mh difficulties and the significant attacks and killings of people with knives?
how can you expect people with no mh training to take on the level of responsibility to say “nothing will happen!”
are these doctors happy to make written statements to say “I in my clinical opinion guarantee that X will never ever harm anyone”

Because I know the difference between OCD intrusions and wanting to harm someone.

But a manager who has no training or qualifications in the subject doesn't.

So what would you do with this information if a team member came to you expressing thought about harming colleagues with a knife?

Because I know the difference between OCD intrusions and wanting to harm someone.

can’t say i give a fig

Someone suggest they want to harm me or my team…. I’m on to HR and saying I don’t want this person on my team anymore.

She’s based that on the very limited information supplied by op?
Why do you know better?