Last week there were numerous newspaper
reports about a mentally ill doctor being nominated and interviewed for a
top post in a county government.
While most reports
were factual and reported events as they actually happened, some were
outright sensational and insulting both to the candidate and mentally
ill people in general.
One newspaper headlined the
story using the term “mad doctor”, while another referred to a previous
case in which the doctor was alleged to have killed someone during an
episode of illness.
Almost all the stories had an
incredulous tone, expressing surprise that a mentally ill individual
could be nominated for such a post in a county government.
But what are the facts?
Mental
illness can only be diagnosed by a qualified professional after taking a
detailed history of the patient, and a physical and mental state
examination.
In many cases, investigations have to be
carried out to establish the exact cause of the symptoms and, in some
instances, physical causes are identified and treated, eliminating the
mental illness totally.
Many people with mental
illnesses are unaware of this fact, and continue to suffer from serious
symptoms without knowing that they can be assisted to live a happier,
healthier life.
These “silent sufferers” are to be found at all echelons of society, from the poorest community to the most affluent groups.
It
follows, therefore, that even at the top levels of our many governments
it is possible that some leaders are mentally ill but are unaware of
this fact.
Most people think that mental illness is so obvious that it is easy to identify an individual suffering from such an illness.
Unfortunately this is not the case.
Mental
illnesses run the entire gamut of human experience, from mild forms of
anxiety disorders through moderately severe depressive episodes to the
more obvious psychotic episodes that many identify with the term
“madman”.
It is, therefore, unfair to target an
individual and label them negatively simply because they suffered a
severe episode of mental illness and displayed their symptoms in public.
Obviously we need to articulate a policy on employment for people with mental illnesses.
Such
a policy must be careful to avoid falling short of the constitutional
injunction against discrimination on the basis of one’s health status.
Such
a policy may prescribe, for instance, that a person suffering from
mental illness is entitled to equal opportunity when seeking employment
based on their ability and experience.
The only caveat
that may be employed is that such a person must produce evidence of
continued treatment and follow-up by a mental health specialist in order
to ensure that their mental illness does not interfere with their work.
This
would mean that even after employment, should an employee develop a
mental illness, they would be entitled to receive treatment and continue
working once the treating physician gives the green light.
Assuming that one is unable to work by virtue of having a mental illness is abusive, discriminatory and downright inhuman.
Should
we decide that people with mental illnesses should not occupy certain
posts in government or elsewhere, we must begin by conducting a mental
status evaluation of everyone in those positions to ensure that they do
not have a mental illness that interferes with the execution of their
duties.
Only after doing this would we be justified to lock out any fresh applicants with mental illness.
Dr Atwoli is a consultant psychiatrist and senior lecturer at Moi University’s School of Medicine. lukoye@gmail.com
No comments :
Post a Comment