to say don't go and get signed off with stress

[writingonthewall]

I see this all the time on MN

OP: there's been a death in the family, I'm doing fine but need time off work to organise the funeral/comfort DH. work will only give me 3 days compassionate leave, after that I have to take holiday or unpaid leave

everyone else: go to your GP and get signed off with stress.

before I get flamed, I am a GP and I fully understand that bereavement hits different people in different ways. I sometimes do sign people off work after a bereavement - if you can't stand up for crying, then you can't work. And whilst there is no hierarchy of grief, as a general rule losing a child is very very traumatic whilst losing a parent is something that you do expect to happen at some point. So no problems with signing certificates for genuine mental health problems post bereavement.

What I do object to is this "get signed off with stress" when you aren't ill.

Do people not realise that, firstly, you are asking the GP to commit fraud. Secondly general practice is buckling. We are under resourced (all practices in one area I know are about to lose 20-25% of their funding) and even if we had the money, there are no GPs to recruit. And it's going to get worse if the new juniors contract doesn't get sorted out.

Every appointment taken up with a medicalisation of normal life, is an appointment that someone who is ill can't have and a potential delay in the diagnosis of someone else's cancer or other serious condition.

so please. see your GP if you are ill - physically or mentally. But think before you do and don't involve us in your battles with your employer and your general normal life events. Being sad after a bereavement is normal. The treatment is to talk about the person you have lost, cry a bit, and take care of yourself. It isn't to rush to the doctor for a medical cure.

I love the thought that GPs have clout to use on employers.

GPs barely have clout to survive.

Don't the GPS have some type of professional union? The GMC? Would it not be them that would lobby for change? I don't know. All i was trying to point out is it's not an individual person issue, it's an institutional issue. No point just coming down hard on individual who need the stress week because they are dealing with an awful lot of stress.

the stress week

Dealing with stressful situations is not the same as having a medical condition

But anyway, if it was a week then surely you'd self-certify?

Not referring specifically to the OP but some of the other posts - do people honestly believe that a bereavement is seen as a golden opportunity to milk it?

The GMC are the regulatory body, not a union.

The BMA are trying to fight. Currently, they're putting everything into the Junior Doctors campaign to try and fight the onslaught from the government. The BMA are totally exhausting themselves fighting for the NHS as we used to know it. The NHS died with the Health and Social Care Act, and what we have now is crumbling, because it was supposed to. The BMA are doing their best.

manicinsomniac you sound like me when my dad died....though I was 28 and he was 56, so I was a little older but not much. As I mentioned earlier, he had a horrible death (went into an acute psychotic state, despite no history of mental illness, locked himself into the garage and drank some weedkiller.) I dealt with it with anti depressants and going back to work straight away. I needed the structure of work to distract me. I worked in a male prison, so hardly a nice little job in Greggs. Not easy, but there you go. The Great British Stiff Upper Lip.

It is interesting to hear a view from medical people because I have heard that it is very very frowned upon to go sick in this industry, if that's the right word. I'm wondering if it does colour your views a little bit, o p. You get on with it so you feel that everyone should be the same

manic the difference ebteen you and the OP though is that she should have learnt as a GP that not everyone is reacting the same and that what seems to be right for her/you (ie no big deal if your parent dies at 75yo) is a big deal for other people.

The difference is that she is a HCP.

Just a comment about 'business aren't charities'.

Well imo a business wants to have their employees ready to do some work and be efficient.
If giving 2 weeks compassionate leave means someone can sort a lot of stuff out, get back on their feet (enough to be able to work). Then so be it. Because the other option is for them to struggle on and then be on long term sick with depression and/or stress because they weren't given the two weeks compasionate leave in the first place. Or they loose trust in the company and don't make a lot of effort, just the minimum etc etc.

So the bottom line is that, in the long run, It's much better for companies to be 'charitable' towards their employees.

The people actually running the businesses don't seem to share your opinion and one would have to believe they are in the best position to know what works.

I'm sorry for your loss spidey
I am also, along with my family, a survivor of death from suicide (if that seems an acceptable way to talk about our loss)
I have coped by losing my P/T job in pre-school and concentrating on looking after my teenage DC. Also hoping to start a course in something that interests me at our local college soon.
Whatever gets you through.

Are they? I know plenty of companies that will look after their employees very well because they know that wo them they will struggle.
It's not because we always hear about the ones who don't that it's the case for all.
Nor does it mean that not looking after your employees doesn't affect how well you do as a company. Maybe those could do even better if they did care a bit more.

I say that as a business owner myself btw.

I'm so glad my boss and work don't have the same attitude that some of the posters have, on here. I have no doubt I would not be alive if I was bullied into work, to do the same hands on care for others, that I had to do for my DH. Yes, some people find work helps, but why judge those that can't cope? Why is your opinion the right one? Should everyone just struggle on and keep a stiff upper lip? What if they can't cope, but listen to the self righteous and go to work anyway? What if that purses them over the edge? Is that ok?

Loveboursin I agree with both your posts entirely.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-35663349

Interesting article about GPs being signed off with stress and depression.

Poverty define can't cope. If you mean their mental health starts to suffer, then you'll be pleased to know they're exactly the people rhe op was hoping would access GP services.

People are reading what they think the op said, rather than what she actually did say.

I think people are responding to the general tone of the OP Stealth, which many may find a little disappointing in it's understanding of issues around bereavement, and in terms of general empathy, coming from a GP.

We need parity for mental health and physical health as both are vital for well-being.

Personally I don't think you can be absolutely clear cut as to what is a normal reaction to grief and when the degree of upset and stress indicates a degree of mental ill health. As PP have said perhaps trying to make this distinction shows that as a society we are asking the wrong questions here.

There needs to be more adequate/generous provision for people following a close bereavement, such as a recognised statutory provision for bereavement leave of at least a week.