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.

Exactly let's splash.
Op is completely in agreement that those suffering from stress should be signed off, but is arguing that grief and bereavement are not illnesses and do not be default cause stress.
And yes there may be few other options. Taking it to the extreme, one option would be to rob a bank and then resign. No one would do that would they?
Please note *I am NOT repeat NOT, comparing being signed off with stress when you are not stressed to robbing a bank. I am trying to point out the absurdity of doing it because there aren't any other options.

Let's face it, without major reform of all sectors working lives are getting consistently worse. Governments (and I mean all not just a particular party) need to be for the people and mandate a work life balance rather than employees being expected to accept whatever Oliver esc "please Sir, can I have some unpaid compassionate leave"

I don't know what it's like to be a GP, but if ever I have to go I am ever so humble and scurry in and out as fast as possible. I suppose some people do put on Oscar-winning performances, and in the case of bereavement (again, not child/spouse) I can imagine it is difficult to gauge the level of grief and whether it really does require a sick note. It certainly can't be legislated for. I come back to grandparents - they may have six, ten, twelve grandchildren - would it be reasonable for every one of these to take bereavement leave?

Why do GPs need to lie? When my MIL died very suddenly before christmas, I telephoned my GP surgery, explained the situation to the receptionist who said there was no need for an appointment, the note would be waiting for me that afternoon. The reason for absence on the fit note was 'bereavement'. Not 'stress' or 'depression', just 'bereavement'.

Perhaps, OP, your surgery could consider implementing this practice instead?

OP, I agree with you, especially about the wasted time on appointments for self-indulgent malingerers, and this: the "medicalisation of normal life."

People need to be stronger and stop looking to external entities to solve all of their problems or make like easier for them, quite frankly.

Faking illness and exhorting a GP commit fraud because one doesn't like one's employer's leave policies (policies one agreed to upon taking the job) is reprehensible.

It is terrible, OP, that you have to actually address formal complaints with people who want loads of free time off work. And that employers have to put up with this claptrap, too.

I agree - I had to laugh at that post about things getting worse. I'd like to see a Victorian mill worker rock up and inform the overseer that their grandma had died and they'd need a few months off. Oh, and they'd have had to pay to see the doctor into the bargain.

Fil's df was killed in action in WWII. Fil asked his boss for a couple of days off work to be with his mother. The answer was no.

I find it frankly bizarre that people would need 4-6 months to get over the death of a parent, assuming the parent is of a reasonably typical age (i.e. we're not talking about an 18 yr old losing a 40 yr old parent, but rather a 45 year old losing a 70 yr old parent). People get old and they die. The world keeps turning.

Do we really need that race to the bottom, Rhoda.

I agree with the OP in general.
There are too many people around wanting their lives to get a "quick fix" from a third party, rather than facing up to normal life events or situations themselves.
Where has the famous British stiff upper lip gone?

I think some of us are pointing out that things are generally getting better, not worse, in terms of workers rights.

When my father died I took a week's leave to make arrangements and attend his funeral. I have recently dealt with a member of staff who was signed off with stress for 3 months after her 90+ year old mother died.
I firmly agree with OP.

I'm a GP also. And I think three days leave is completely insufficient after the loss of a close relative or friend. But I agree with the OP that the pathologising of normal grief by calling it 'stress' is unhelpful. Really employers should have a more realistic leave policy for bereavement - at a minimum 2-3 weeks would seem fair, though obviously what's needed will vary widely depending on the situation and relationship.
I still sign the sick notes, though, because I recognise that people often have no other option. I always write 'bereavement' rather than 'stress'.

YANBU OP. One of my colleagues has been signed off for 2 weeks & I'm currently having to work several days of overtime (I work PT) to cover her role. This is costing my employer a lot of money and I'm giving up a large part of my week. It's not even an immediate family member who has passed away, so she isn't arranging the funeral etc.

I have been in the position of crying in the toilets at work following a bereavement. Nobody should be doing that

Oh I don't know about that, I don't say this in a "YABU" way at all- but you might be back at work,. and then something gets you, and you go to the loos, and have a little weep. I think that's very normal?

I agree with OP. It's not a simple matter of being allowed a few days off. On these threads, people don't generally think about who is going to pay for this sick leave. The government? A small employer? There are not limitless funds.

Recently local hospital was making repeated public announcements to say do not come to A&E unless you have x type of illness eg life threatening

They promoted use of walk in centres, doctor surgery, pharmacies to spread the work load

So my suggestion would be if the OP has no clear policy at her surgery of when a sick note will be supplied, I would expect that people will continue to arrive

I believe the usual policy is that you can self certificate yourself for 5 days
Extra days on top of this would need a doctors note

I do agree that people behave in different ways when bereaved

I have known people who lived many countries away from their parents, they agreed extra time off with their employer

I have been in the position of crying in the toilets at work following a bereavement. Nobody should be doing that

But what's the alternative? It's quite normal to have bad days months and years after losing someone. I'm all for the provision of a couple of weeks compassionate leave for the immeadiate aftermath of a death but that won't stop the situation you describe.

This is a very delicate issue and it's true that everyone's experiences of stress/bereavement etc are different.

That said: a few years ago I had what can only be described as a breakdown after the collapse of a LTR.

I self-harmed, couldn't eat, cried a lot. I lived by myself so didn't really see anyone. I went to work. I was rubbish. I couldn't really function. So I started calling in sick.

However, I found that after a few days I felt even worse. I had no structure, no reason to get dressed so forced myself to go back.

I think it was the best thing to do. I was a terrible employee for a while but I was there and doing my best, and that helped my mental health tremendously.

I think that people often think that what they need is to not go to work. When in actual fact the distraction and routine of the working day can be very important.

That's just my opinion.

I find it frankly bizarre that people would need 4-6 months to get over the death of a parent, assuming the parent is of a reasonably typical age

With respect you can't measure everyone else's grief by your own standards. Everyone deals with grief differently and relationships are different.

I am no longer working, but when I was and dh had a serious head injury I was given the full amount of compassionate leave, which was six weeks, four paid, two unpaid. No doctor's note necessary. Afaik, the same was given for bereavement of a close relative.

Dh wasn't 'better' when I had to go back to work, but I was in a far better mental state and we'd had time to set things up so that I was able to go back to work without worrying myself sick about him the whole time I was there.

I do think that, for the most part, the problem lies with employers putting profits ahead of staff wellbeing.

It varies widely from company to company, some seem to have zero compassion, others use common sense and a bit of sensitivity to make a judgement call on a case by case basis.

To be honest, if you are really struggling with grief to the extent that you can't function, then you do need to see your GP and should be signed off. Some people cope better than others and it isn't necessarily dependent on who they have lost. If you have cut and dried rules relating to the nature of the relationship it doesn't take into account, for example, people who were raised by their Grandparents or another relative. Often what's needed is more compassion and a healthy dose of common sense, along with a more individual approach to staff welfare.

*I have been in the position of crying in the toilets at work following a bereavement. Nobody should be doing that

Oh I don't know about that, I don't say this in a "YABU" way at all- but you might be back at work,. and then something gets you, and you go to the loos, and have a little weep. I think that's very normal?*

It is a normal response to find yourself crying. However, if it's that normal, why does it have to happen in the toilets? Workplaces are not appropriate places to deal with grief. If they were, nobody would find themselves crying in the toilets at work, hidden away, pretending it wasn't actually happening.

you don't need to get signed off, you can self cert for 7 days.

I appreciate if people have arseholes for employers, but most will be understanding and probably offer you the use of some of your holiday or time off unpaid.

my dad died 2yrs ago and at the time i was allowed 2 weeks of unpaid leave as the 3 days wasn't enough.

Squiggle I suppose what if it happens one year down the line. You can't be signed off until the grief has gone.

You have my sympathy OP and I agree with everything you say.