Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our company has a therapist

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 51 posts

Re: Our company has a therapist

#11

Post by DanBC »

I've spoken to a bunch of people at different companies. Their companies provide confidential talking therapies through an occupational health service.

A lot of people I spoke to said they would be unlikely to use that service because they wanted a clear seperation between health care and employment. That unease didn't totally go even when the talking therapy was an external service bought in by the employing company. People did say they'd be more at ease talking to a fully independent therapist.

It's a shame because in England the therapists would not be allowed to share anything with the employers, but there's no easy way to provide that reassurance.

> I’ll be the first to admit that this is a fairly uncommon step for a company to take.

It's more common among big providers.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#13

Post by swagmeister »

detaro wrote: post #9
swagmeister wrote: post #7

My first instinct is to hate on this idea because it removes choice. But sometimes, even when given a choice, people don't help themselves. The ethical integrity of the therapist would have to be very strong though.

What choice does it remove?

I guess you're right, it adds choice, but softly discourages you from seeing an outside therapist. Why not just see the company therapist? There is also some moral hazard involved.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#14

Post by DanBC »

tunesmith wrote: post #3

This sounds pretty dangerous - even if the executives of a company claim that it is confidential, why should the employees believe it? Therapists talk about their patients in a very general sense all the time, and even if they don't, an employer is going to want to have some idea of how the therapist's job is going. In a small company, it would be far too easy to put two and two together, and then react in a way that…

The company is in the UK so there are laws governing use of information.

Hopefully the company chose a BACP registered therapist and so that therapist will be covered by their registration rules too.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#15

Post by natrius »

tunesmith wrote: post #3

This sounds pretty dangerous - even if the executives of a company claim that it is confidential, why should the employees believe it? Therapists talk about their patients in a very general sense all the time, and even if they don't, an employer is going to want to have some idea of how the therapist's job is going. In a small company, it would be far too easy to put two and two together, and then react in a way that…

While employees should definitely get their own therapists, I'm not sure it's a bad idea for a company to offer one for free while encouraging them to find their own. Removing the barrier to entry and the stigma by making it a standard thing might be worth doing.

Then again, if there are insurance plans that have this sort of thing in mind, making that plan standard and encouraging people to use it sounds better.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#16

Post by andreyf »

detaro wrote: post #9
swagmeister wrote: post #7

My first instinct is to hate on this idea because it removes choice. But sometimes, even when given a choice, people don't help themselves. The ethical integrity of the therapist would have to be very strong though.

What choice does it remove?

I think he meant that it implies that an employer can pick a single therapist for all of their employees, and that there may be perceived pressure to see that therapist over others. In reality it can take quite a bit of visiting different people to find a therapist one feels comfortable with.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#17

Post by andreyf »

swagmeister wrote: post #13
detaro wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What choice does it remove?

I guess you're right, it adds choice, but softly discourages you from seeing an outside therapist. Why not just see the company therapist? There is also some moral hazard involved.

I think it's potentially more than just soft, as it could also lead to an in-group of people who are seeing the company therapist.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#18

Post by nraynaud »

I had some troubles with an employee of mine in the past and think he would have benefitted from a shrink (I suspect he was heavily depressed), but as the boss, I found it complicated to do that for various reasons: 1) conflict of interest 2) free will of the patient to go there 3) we're bordering on medical territory and it's a minefield for a company.

There is no happy ending, I left the company without having acted on it and the employee left recently, but as far as I know he's living erratically and unemployed now.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#19

Post by learc83 »

DanBC wrote: post #11

I've spoken to a bunch of people at different companies. Their companies provide confidential talking therapies through an occupational health service. A lot of people I spoke to said they would be unlikely to use that service because they wanted a clear seperation between health care and employment. That unease didn't totally go even when the talking therapy was an external service bought in by the employing company…

>It's a shame because in England the therapists would not be allowed to share anything with the employers, but there's no easy way to provide that reassurance.

Additionally, if you build a relationship with a therapist, you might want to be able to continue with that therapist beyond your current employment.

Re: Our company has a therapist

#20

Post by mgkimsal »

DanBC wrote: post #11

I've spoken to a bunch of people at different companies. Their companies provide confidential talking therapies through an occupational health service. A lot of people I spoke to said they would be unlikely to use that service because they wanted a clear seperation between health care and employment. That unease didn't totally go even when the talking therapy was an external service bought in by the employing company…

"because they wanted a clear seperation between health care and employment. "

And yet... there's very strikingly little political movement to reduce/remove/eliminate "benefits" which include health insurance provided by employers.

Post reply on HN