To be upset that MH provider had no experience in MH?

[feelfooled]

I recently had a session with a MH provider from a major charity. It was the initial session and the questionnaire I had to answer was very personal and involved me revealing things I have not told anyone.
She asked some additional very personal and exposing questions. I found her cold and clinical and she sounded very young. I have found her rigid, inflexible and lacking understanding or compassion in a further encounter. I have looked her up on Linked in and she has no listed professional experience or qualification in mental health at all. She has an admin background and customer service background from a major retailer. SHe has been in this post only 6 months.
The course I would have done with her was structured but it still requires a lot of intimate sharing.

I feel really exposed and vulnerable and frankly humiliated to have shared my greatest vulnerabilities with someone with no MH training. The things I told her are things I find difficult to admit to myself - they are most personal, vulnerable things about me. I haven't even told my closest friends. Frankly her background in admin and customer service completely makes sense of her cold efficiency no-nonsense attitude. Which may be great for admin but not for dealing with people suffering great distress and trauma like myself.

I have done another structured course with someone from this charity and they were a trained counsellor and brilliant. I would never have embarked on this course or shared so much if I had realised this new person had no MH training or experience. I feel really cheated by the charity. I feel I should have been told the course was taught by someone with no qualifications or experience in MH so that I could decide whether to proceed ( I wouldn't have).

WIBU to make a complaint to the charity?. TBH I am already struggling to cope and this experience has knocked me further, destroyed my trust in the charity and also means I am no longer prepared to get the help from them I desperately need. I don't know where to turn now.

I would make a complaint about her attitude, yes, though be prepared for them telling you that she's received some kind of brief in-house "training" and therefore you shouldn't complain. With a side-order of beggars can't be choosers, if you're lucky.

I would enquire what level of training people are meant to receive. It could be that a person gets a basic sheep dip training and are then let loose. If that's the case then feedback about needing more training will be helpful to the organisation.

Is her linked in definitely up to date? She may have had in house training

When I worked in mental health it was quite common for psychological therapy to be delivered by people undergoing clinical training.

It's a bit like having undergraduate seminars led by PhD students.

I think it depends - when training for a qualification in counselling or psychotherapy you need to do a placement. So she might not have had any training but could have done 200+placement hours.
There are often standard forms which are used - it’s fine to refuse to answer some of it too.

You might also get a lot of flannel about how nobody else has complained, how a lot of people have found it helpful, maybe some guilt tripping about other people behind you in the queue, and all sorts of guff to try to make you feel bad about the fact you expected a trained mental health professional to be delivering mental health interventions.

It doesn't matter that it's a charity. You don't let unqualified people loose on vulnerable people's mental health unsupervised (and a maximum of 6 months on-the-job training counts as unqualified in my book).

It looks up to date. Thing is, if she has had in-house training it is not showing in her manner or ability to relate or connect to people in distress. I also feel I should have been warned that this person was not a mental health professional, so that I could make the choice about whether to proceed and how much to share if I did.

Also, the above stuff about trainees and placements: trainees are supposed to tell you that they're trainees. They're not yet operating under their own steam and are supposed to be supervised by someone qualified.

The outsourced NHS CBT provider in my area uses untrained call centre staff to do the initial paperwork session. Most patients are then offered an online CBT course, with no interaction with a mental health professional.

There is nothing on her linked in to say she is in training. In fact looking at it again, she is still working as an admin.

@CorrBlimeyGG

The outsourced NHS CBT provider in my area uses untrained call centre staff to do the initial paperwork session. Most patients are then offered an online CBT course, with no interaction with a mental health professional.

Jesus. I feel quite lucky now that IAPT usually turn me down for being too mental.

@CorrBlimeyGG

The outsourced NHS CBT provider in my area uses untrained call centre staff to do the initial paperwork session. Most patients are then offered an online CBT course, with no interaction with a mental health professional.

I wasn't just getting the initial paper work session from her though - she was delivering a mental health course. I would have found that inappropriate though too, due to the personal level of the questions.

But it sounds like OP was given the impression that the whole course is going to be done by this individual, rather than her just filling in an assessment form?

Sorry, crossed messages there

Why are you stalking her on LinkedIn. Poor woman. It’s highly unlikely the charity would be employing her if she’s had no MH training at all. Why don’t you check with the charity.

If you want to pay for MH input, you’ll get more options on who you work with you.

You can ask what training the staff have. You can also request to change ‘therapists’.

yes complain.

pretty much with what you siad in your OP. It is a good summary of her attitude and why you found it a problem.

I think in these situations very few people complain, they usually just leave. So the charity won't know there is a problem

@FrownedUpon

Why are you stalking her on LinkedIn. Poor woman. It’s highly unlikely the charity would be employing her if she’s had no MH training at all. Why don’t you check with the charity.

If you want to pay for MH input, you’ll get more options on who you work with you.

It's recommended you check up on therapists you're thinking of working with, to make sure they have the right training/registration/memberships. I don't see why that should be any different just because you're seeing one via a charity. The whole point of LinkedIn is for people to look you up to see what qualifications and work background you have. It's hardly like OP hacked her Facebook.

@FrownedUpon

Why are you stalking her on LinkedIn. Poor woman. It’s highly unlikely the charity would be employing her if she’s had no MH training at all. Why don’t you check with the charity.

If you want to pay for MH input, you’ll get more options on who you work with you.

She has her qualifications listed. There are no MH related ones. She has a business/ admin qualification.

I checked her Linked in as her attitude is so cold I started to suspect she had no qualifications or experience. She just doesn't seem to understand the clientele she is dealing with. She is treating this like an admin process, not a mental health service for people in distress.

Charities exist for people who cannot pay. It doesn't mean you should get rubbish and the last person I worked with from that charity was a qualified counsellor.

Charities exist for people who cannot pay.

This is rarely the whole story when charities deliver things like mental health services. The vast majority will actually be funded by either the NHS or local councils, but it would not be unusual for the amount paid to not cover the cost of actually delivering it - hence why corners get cut. Or, the Third Sector provider gets its pricing wrong, or bids for a contract that it turns out it cannot deliver, so again corners get cut.

@Otherpeoplesteens

Charities exist for people who cannot pay.

This is rarely the whole story when charities deliver things like mental health services. The vast majority will actually be funded by either the NHS or local councils, but it would not be unusual for the amount paid to not cover the cost of actually delivering it - hence why corners get cut. Or, the Third Sector provider gets its pricing wrong, or bids for a contract that it turns out it cannot deliver, so again corners get cut.

If they are cutting corners they should let people know what these are. In my job I often have to ask people sensitive questions - but I start everyone interview telling them who I am and that they don't have to answer any questions if they do not feel comfortable.

These are deeply personal services and if they not provided by people with the skills and experiences to know how to work with people in distress that should be clear from the start. They should say these services are delivered by people without MH qualifications and who are not counsellors. Then you are informed. I would rather have worked through the course myself online than have exposed myself to someone who was not a professional.

Its all about informed consent. And I don't feel I was given the opportunity of that.

I’m sorry this happened to you. I would definitely complain - but please be aware that anyone can say they are a counsellor or a therapist.

Utterly outrageous....

They should at least tell you they are admin, so at least you can make the decision to continue.

On a wider level, if they are using admin to screen initial assessments... They need to review their procedures.

I'd also write a letter of complaint to whoever does the commissioning to you locally.

Unfortunately it's the way of the world these days.

Most people know that nowadays if you ring the GP surgery you'll have to give details of your condition to the receptionist in order for your call to be directed appropriately.

What most people don't know is that the two week rule for suspected cancer referrals to the NHS simply requires you to be seen by "a specialist" within two weeks to meet the target. So you get referred to general surgery because of a breast lump, and on day 14 of your two weeks you get seen by a proctology nurse, not that anyone would trouble themselves to volunteer that information. I first witnessed this in 2007, and it's still rife. And yet we deify 'our amazing NHS.'

Yes, it should be clear what training and qualifications the worker has so yanbu on that, and the way she has dealt with you has left you distressed so yanbu on that either. It is worthy of a complaint because how are they helping you exactly?