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 is in the "company's best interest" yet not in the employee's. I'd feel less comfortable confiding in a company-hired therapist than I would confiding in HR - it seems the better alternative would be to offer a heightened health insurance package that covers frequent therapy, along with a liberal "time off for doctors appointments" policy.
I've spoken to a bunch of people at different companies. Their companies provide confidential talking therapies through an occupational health service.<p>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.<p>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.<p>> I’ll be the first to admit that this is a fairly uncommon step for a company to take.<p>It's more common among big providers.
I would never go to a company therapist. Go out and pay for one yourself. There is a clear conflict of interest for the therapist and while they may seem to be nice it's not worth the risk.
Many large corporations I have worked for offer similar services for years<p>My current job offers me yearly therapist/psychiatrist dollars that can be utilized as part of benefits packages as well as online phone chat with therapist and counselors.
they have been offering this for at least 8 years (maybe even earlier, but they just didnt advertise it)<p>It is done through 3rd party services through our company health insurance and benefits package.<p>actually going to see a psychiatrist is completely confidential, as i goto any psychiatrist i find and i simply get re-reimbursed the dollars.
my company is not involved at all and doesnt know about it (unless there is a re-imbursement issue which i have to engage HR to figure out, but they still do not know the details of who i went to see and why, i just give them a receipt to chase down with the insurance company)<p>and the online/chat/phone counselling is completely anonymous besides mentioning the company codes during signup (not distinct to me, same code used by 20,000+ employees and i can signup using any alias that my company does not know).<p>these services are also extended to my immediate family aswell.<p>edit:
i would not trust a company employed psychiatrist ever as some have outlined their experiences, that person is on the company dollar and you are not in a real confidentiality scenario. essentially they are just advisors/counsellors in HR on the company dollar with company interests in stake, not your personal health, typically without any confidentiality agreement.<p>utilize services through your health insurance and never directly with your employer.<p>edit2:
just wanted to add that just in general, if health insurance/benefits packages are important to you and weighs in on taking the job, ensure that the health insurance is through a 3rd party company not in which your employer would directly re-reimburse you at their discretion. there should be a distinct line between.<p>Edit3:
Confidentiality issues aside, I especially would not want to discuss potential therapeutic/psychiatric/mental state issues with someone you might interact with at work outside of your session ( bump into them while getting coffee in the cafeteria at the office, see them interacting with other employees casually cause they are colleagues and not a patient).<p>Need a separation personally
>Life-coach. Counsellor. Therapist. Call it what you will.<p>This is not merely a matter of terminology. I don't know how it is in the UK, but here in the US "life coach" requires no sort of training or licensure. In most places in the US, to call yourself a "therapist" requires those kinds of credentials.<p>So, as usual, words are important.
I think this is a great idea. While I think the execution could be improved (maybe a person wants to see an different therapist, or one outside the office), but attempting to remove the stigma surrounding mental health, and giving low friction access is huge. There is also the acknowledgement of the fact that most people aren't perfect, and nearly everyone could benefit from some sort of counseling. If everyone at your company is in perfect mental health you're either incredibly lucky, or kidding yourself.<p>I think Shanley Kane put it best[1]: "People are broken, and people work at companies."<p>[1] <a href="https://modelviewculture.com/news/the-eternal-and-toxic-optimism-of-startup-advice" rel="nofollow">https://modelviewculture.com/news/the-eternal-and-toxic-opti...</a>
I was sceptical when I read the headline. For one thing, employees may not believe the confidentiality. For another, if only a few people attend, and then office is in the building, these visits aren't all that confidential.<p>But it looks as if that's not a problem because so many employees are actually using this service. So the benefits seem to outweigh: More employees are seeing "any" therapist at all, they are taking their own mental health more seriously and early interventions are more likely.<p>They also seem to see the therapists as helping them get "better" rather than just fixing some flaw.
I am not the type of person that would ever go out of my way to book a therapist. I won't even go to a doctor unless it is life-threatening. Such things require a lot of planning and fuss and I have better things to do. (Yes yes I know that is unreasonable/unhealthy thinking, but I am who I am).<p>That said, if I was having a stressful week, and a neutral party was just down the hall I knew was paid to be there for me to vent at and get advice from with no strings attached... That is something I could see myself taking a break to walk over and take advantage of.<p>I mean, companies provide all kinds of junk food snacks for employees to take advantage of a few feet away, why not healthy things too? There is a significantly better chance of me visiting a company provided health professional of any kind, than bothering to take time off work/life seek one out myself. I am sure I am not alone in this thinking.<p>I hope more companies follow the example of Ribot on this and the stigma starts to go away. Good going guys.
The normal version of this is "employee assistance program", but that's mainly designed for people with drug/alcohol/etc. problems. Often provided by the health insurance companies, or other benefits. It probably is paid for with <$1/employee/month by the employer.
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.<p>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.
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.
"Shrinks for startups?" (<a href="https://twitter.com/mikellsolution/status/571590631304388608" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/mikellsolution/status/571590631304388608</a>) really needed to be coined.