NHS Excluding people in treatment for mental health conditions.

[Heathe]

Going to enable voting but realise this may not do me any favours. I am currently in treatment for a mental health condition, and currently applying for roles within mental health trusts. I have previously worked during this treatment so can demonstrate I can handle treatment and working, however, many of the jobs are stating that a person has to be in recovery, has to have experience of recovery etc.

These are Lived Experience, Expert by Experience, Peer Support Roles, Support Worker roles etc.

I'm just wondering whether excluding people currently in treatment for mental health conditions is actually against the Equality Act as a mental health condition is a protected characteristic.

Apart from the fact it has made me feel completely inadequate and has really knocked my confidence, I am starting to feel really frustrated that people who are treating patients with mental health conditions are so open to excluding them in this way, particularly when many of us are in group therapy so we have experience of hearing and dealing with other people's concerns and issues.

I'm interested to hear if anyone has a legal perspective on this, or if anyone else has found this when applying for roles?

YANBU - this is shit

YABU - this is sensible

That title was meant to be "NHS excluding people for jobs who are in mental health treatment".

I think it probably depends on what the condition and treatment are. I have suffered from an eating disorder and there is often a competitive element to those (as we see often on MN…) so receiving support from someone else with the same condition would be completely unhelpful.

And please, if you are voting YABU can you explain why? In what other profession is it ok to actively exclude people with mental health conditions having treatment?

I think a blanket exclusion is unfair. For example someone very stable on medication is still in treatment but could be perfect for these roles. Someone currently requiring inpatient treatment would not be in the right place for the job at the current time. Other forms of treatment would fall somewhere in the middle.

I think the NHS is probably on a sticky wicket really. Applicants will have Equality Act protection by definition and I think it is discriminatory to rule out any form of treatment. They should look at applicants individual circumstances.

It's also quite limiting if their peer support workers only have a limited experience of mental illness. Some conditions are lifelong and recovery is about living well with the condition. Peer support should be able to demonstrate that.

@AppleBottomRats Thank you. I can see that point of view - I mean do I do understand some times conditions do come with the competitiveness, yet, if we are expected to attend group therapy (where that does occur), and we have shown we can cope with it then what would be the problem?

I have only applied for roles that literally have knowledge of my own experience and those of the groups I have been in, yet I am still getting told I need to be in recovery (by Clinicians who publicly state that recovery is a piss poor concept that should be binned).

@Heathe

There are many professions where your mental health conditions could be reason for refusal

The police
Prison service
Many government roles (that require enhanced vetting)
The armed forces
The fire service

I'm not sure how you can say it's discriminatory against those in treatment - if they are only accepting those who have experienced recovery, it's either fine or is discriminatory against everyone who hasn't experienced recovery. Being in treatment is pretty much irrelevant - you might recover and then quality, or never recover and be stuck not qualifying like everyone not in treatment or recovered.

I understand your frustration and why it seems unfair. But having liaised with people in Lived Experience/Peer Support type roles I also understand why these stipulations are in place. I have come across a couple of people in such roles who were clearly still unwell, and the demands of the role did not seem to be helping, nor was it helpful to the service users they were supporting. In one instance it also put colleagues in a difficult position as the person did not accept that they were unwell at the time.

Staff need to be robust enough to deal with patient's issues.

The employer also has a duty to protect the health of their employees.

If you are still undergoing treatment (rather than being recovered), I can see that this would be an issue for any employer.

I didn't know that mental health conditions are a protected characteristic.

@CheeseyToasts - I've actually had enhanced vetting with my condition, and mental health does not exclude you from the police (or at least mine doesn't, had a lovely chat with them about this a few weeks ago).

@BoredWithLife Ok well if someone has recovered, they no longer are covered under the EA (even though this is a bit of a dodgy way to look at it). But recovery is seen as "not being in treatment" in the cases I am discussing. That's the benchmark.

I haven’t voted, I’m undecided. I think it depends on the condition the person’s being treated for. For me personally … if I were to need help, I wouldn’t feel comfortable leaning on somebody if I wasn’t sure they could handle it.

If i was someone accessing peer support/ lived experience type therapy, I wouldn't want to be supported by someone whose own mental health was still fragile.

I'd want to feel that the person supporting me was robust enough to hear my own issues without the worry that I might set them back. I'd hate to be responsible for someone else's relapse.

@AlternativelyWired yes they are, under the disability umbrella.

@neverbeenskiing @lisers but we have to deal with those types of things in every group setting we are put into - it's not only staff that hear what happens in those groups, and it's not only staff that deal with it. If I had never done any groups then this may not concern me so much, but, I've had to deal with many difficult situations in groups as well. However, I do understand what you are saying, and I would not be applying for the roles if I wasn't feeling resilient enough.

Did you miss where I wrote 'could'

Depending on the condition it would definitely be an issue for the police

You seem to think any discrimination isn't ok

There are plenty of jobs where someone with depression wouldn't be suitable. Or someone with Bi-polar etc.

You wouldn't know about my treatment though - that would be confidential. So patients would not know I was still accessing therapy? Just like you wouldn't know your line manager in any other job was accessing therapy.

I think a blanket policy is extremely unfair.

I work for the emergency services and my initial application was rejected as soon as I walked in for my medical. Had they asked ‘Why?’ I could’ve told them I had been out on them after end of life care for my mother and consequent bereavement and I was currently working as a 999 call operator so experienced with dealing with distressing incidents and I knew they didn’t impact my life.

A fair few years on; I am now in the role I was rejected for initially. I cope with it fine. I am considering a transfer (same job, different part of the country) and I’m struggling with my MH. Still has no impact on my job; work still doesn’t effect me, I handle work absolutely fine and in a healthy manner. But I feel I can’t go see my GP for some support as then I have ‘fresh’ mental health on my record which might prevent a transfer.

I do appreciate why it needs to be a consideration; particularly in my role as you see some nasty stuff and they don’t want to be responsible for triggering a mental health crisis. However, I think there should be a ban on these general policies as each situation is different.

@CheeseyToasts I did, I am sorry.

If you exclude anyone "in treatment" then peer support will be less relevant for supporting people with serious mental illness. Many people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia will be on lifetime meds, even if they manage their symptoms well, for example. Having peer support around experiences that most people can't get their head around is invaluable.

I can’t edit but I missed out; I failed the medical when they took one glance and saw I was on antidepressants which I had started whilst my mum was dying and I was caring for her, her menagerie of pets and working full time.

But as it stands I would know that ALL applicants for the job have been deemed to be in recovery. You are suggesting a scenario where I would know that the person I'm taking to MIGHT still be needing a lot of support for their own mental health. I wouldn't be comfortable with that

Sorry - all successful applicants

@Foreverlexicon that is really horrible, I am sorry - it's blanket policies like this that should not exist.

I have one hour of individual therapy a week now- but due to the timings I have to tell whoever I work for. I don't take any medication and have never been sectioned / an inpatient.

@NuttyinNotts exactly - that's how I feel. Some conditions you don't recover from, you learn to manage and live alongside with, as a lot of clinicians say "recovery is a very poor concept" for those conditions, yet we still have the bar of recovery held against us whilst applying for jobs.

I vote yabu.

Because they aren’t specifically excluding anyone receiving treatment. The op is misleading.

They want, specifically, want people who are in recovery for very clear reasons. Which excludes anyone that’s not in recovery. Many jobs ask for certain experience. Which excludes everyone who doesn’t have that experience.