talk guidelines for "threads like this "

[peridito]

Hi ,deleted thread on 26/11/ by Neonomore .

What are the guidelines that this transgressed ?

Was there an assumption that the OP was discussing suicide . What was the thread "like" in your view ?

I've looked at talk guidelines but it hasn't helped .

TIA
I thought it was someone having a MH crisis .

I strongly disagree with most of the opinions on this thread. Whilst AIBU is the worst for it, there are often really insensitive and unhelpful comments made across all the boards and potentially any thread.

Some absolute arsehole could easily come along and kick a very vulnerable person down further or even encourage them in dangerous actions at any time of the day when moderators aren't instantly available. There's a real potential there for exploitation or harm. It's maybe a small risk as thankfully most people aren't that evil but the stakes are far too high to take the chance.

I think/hope that when MN deleted the thread they also contacted Neo privately .

But of course the rest of us don't know this and just see that bald public statement at the end of the thread .

But if MN were to indicate on their talk guidelines that they try to do this it would be nice .It would even be a kindness were they to add a sentence or two to their "We've deleted this .." to explain that they were trying to communicate with OP but won't be able to give updates etc.

Bluebird what opinions are you disagreeing with ?

I'm just trying to understand MN's perception of the thread and what their protocol is in circumstances like this .

My reading of the thread was that helpful and worried posters felt that:

A) The post shouldn't have been deleted

And

B) Threads like the one being discussed here are a positive and appropriate source of support.

I disagree with both those points because of the risks of not so well meaning or informed posters causing more distress or providing dangerous information.

Bluebird - that's where moderation comes in. Delete the shit. Don't delete the OP when she was finally coming around to accepting that she needed help. She did nothing wrong and all I can say is that the Samaritans are a listening service. They rarely actually speak to you.

Threads like the one being discussed here are a positive and appropriate source of support.

The thread was positive yes but I don’t think anyone posting would say it was an appropriate source of support- that’s why the op was being strongly urged to get urgent help from mental health professionals but at least it was some support while she was waiting for a callback.

But when you're feeling really vulnerable who do you tend to believe more? The negative or the positive person?

Moderation isn't appropriate. Someone has to see it before they can report it to mods for it to be deleted. What if the first person to see it is the vulnerable person? By then the damage is done. Reported posts don't always get looked at immediately either.

I think it was right to delete the post .What was wrong was the wording of the final post from MN to the OP .

The OP was v vunerable and including the bald statement "we don't allow threads like this "is negative /unsupportive/implies that the OP has done something wrong .Signposting the Samaratins was not appropriate unless I have missunderstood their role and they are able to provide the urgent medical attention that the OP needed at that moment .

To give no indication to the other posters that MN would /would try to stay in contact with the poster is v odd and bound to lead to threads like this .And to discourage reporting of worrying posts .

@MichaelMumsnet please comment on this post . It needs to be made clear how posters in danger are dealt with .The current situation gives the impression that you just pull the rug out from their feet with what reads as a curt admonishment.

I really think that this will result in posters actively avoiding reporting worrying threads .

I agree very strongly with perdito

Hello, everyone.

We just wanted to pop in again to answer the questions since our last post. The main concern seems to be about the wording of our deletion message.

We do absolutely take your point that it sounds a bit 'bald', particularly on threads where an OP is having a really difficult time. The wording of these posts we decided on with guidance from The Samaritans and Mind, as we felt that we simply weren't experts on the subject. While the term 'these sorts of threads' does sound odd, the alternative is to be clear about it and say 'threads about suicide' or 'threads about self harm', and we suspect we were advised to avoid those terms as they might be potentially triggering for someone already in a bad place.

We do usually contact posters off the boards in these situations to pass on our list of mental health support contacts, so there is personal contact from MNHQ there. The message is really intended just to let everyone know that a thread has been deleted (without going into personal detail about the OP's situation or leaving people with the impression they might not have been genuine, or anything like that). Unfortunately, the outcome is that the deletion message itself can then feel a little 'cold', and we do understand your concerns about that, but we think it's probably the 'least worst' option.

We'd always be happy to hear other suggestions, though, and we will certainly run this past those professional organisations again when we next look at updating and checking all our processes with threads that mention suicide.

In terms of the moderation of that particular thread, we're afraid we don't think it's fair to discuss that on the boards, hence not giving more information on the thread or in the deletion message, but we have been in contact with the OP of that thread, as we said.

Thanks again for passing on your thoughts. We do appreciate it. Hope that goes some way towards answering your questions.

Thank you for your helpful response.

In terms of the moderation of that particular thread we're afraid we don't think it's fair to discuss that on the boards,
Of course not .I'm sorry if discussing my experience of MN moderation of a thread where someone seemed in a dangerous situation made you think we wanted to breach confidentiality .

I'm sure you could come up with better wording without our advice but...

.I'm absolutely not skilled in this area but would suggest loosing the " we don't allow threads like this " and including something along the lines of ".we feel this thread has gone as far as it can here and that further public discussion is not going to be helpful.We are therefore removing the thread from our online platform but hope that contact off the board between MN and yourself might be possible and helpful .
Professional bodies recommend that people in crisis

call 111 or their GP for emergency out of hours appointment

or ring 999 or go to A&E "

       I have read some of the published advice for moderators in situations like this and suggested template responses, and it doesn't quite tally with what I have seen here . I guess a large organisation like MN has probably had in house training which perhaps diverges a little from advice printed on line so perhaps that explains the divergence .

Thank you again for responding .

As well as deleting the thread, did you also ban the poster?

Telling someone in what was obviously a severe mental health crisis to contact the Samaritans was infantile in this instance. It was clear that she needed immediate urgent medical and psychiatric help. Not some volunteer who listens and says nothing.

I suggest you seek advice from professionals, not charities in future.

Basically, you're discriminating on the basis of mental illness. She is not allowed to discuss her crisis, yet someone who has severe abdominal pain can post as much as they like.

Poor show.

You're giving the impression 'we don't want your sort around these here parts'. 'You're not even fit to be allowed on a supportive forum'.

Can you imagine how devastating that felt? That OP had mentioned as far as I recall that the internet was the only ones she felt cared or something along those lines. And you withdrew that lifeline from her.

It was clear to the dogs on the street, that she was in a severe crisis - not attention seeking or anything else. She was being turned away from every door she kept trying, but that's where the beauty of MN comes in - we kept encouraging her to go back. Some who commented I'm sure would have had direct experience with MH teams.

I think you made the wrong call.

And especially MN who claim to be oh so supportive and aware of mental illness..... I'd like a pretty swift review, seek proper advice and update us on your hopefully renewed policies.

As we can't discuss the moderation of this particular thread it's tricky but I do wonder a bit about the continued reference by MN about their response to posters mentioning suicide .As this seems irrelevant .

But if we are discussing a moderators response to a poster who they think is suicidal then I do wonder why their response wasn't more closely aligned to the guidance from the National Suicide Prevention Association .

I share all your frustration @Righteo but I know we aren't going to get anywhere here . I won't be holding my breath expecting to see revised Talk guidelines .

www.nspa.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/NSPA-Guidelines-Responding-to-Suicidal-Content-Online.pdf

It's like telling you to ring the local quack when you're bleeding profusely. Oh aye. Ring the old Samaritans there.

The ONLY advice in that situation was - go to A&E immediately.
Not deleting her.

I do understand about the deleting ,there could have been a risk that unhelpful posters joined in or that as Neo deterioted more she might have started putting up posts that would have alarmed us all even more .Difficult when we are so helpless to offer practical support .

In a ideal world MN would be able to moderate the thread as it was progressing and delete rubbish and offer appropriate advice and support .

I absolutely agree that just yanking the thread with no attempt to explain why and signposting the Samaritans rather than repeating the advice we'd given ( and the advice given by The National Suicide Prevention Association ) to ring 999 or go to A&E .

Though TBH Neo said she'd phoned 999.So an even more urgent intervention would IMO have been warranted . The org I keep quoting talks about contacting the police and using the IP address to locate someone . I imagine this is difficult and I also imagine it's not something MN would even attempt .

And if you're reading this MN have a look at attached re confidentiality .

I remain really upset about this ,anxious about the effect on the OP and not totally reassured by MN's response .

I keep thinking of "deletion statements "

OP we've seen your post and are worried about you . Please phone 999 if you haven't already done so.

We think you are very vunerable at the moment and we are going to remove this thread to protect you from the possibilty of being exposed to unhelpful posts and also to avoid the possibilty that you may post information that you would not normally wish revealed on a public forum .

We will try and message you offline .

Something like that would help to reassure us too.

Ye - like your last wording Perdito.

I think they banned her too though.

Smacks of 'we don't have time for this. we want nothing to do with mental health crises, go away, we don't want you posting here'

Perfect wording peridito

I really hope they haven’t banned her, that would be completely unnecessary....