Mental Illness and Employment Discrimination

Heather Stuart

Disclosures

Curr Opin Psychiatry. 2006;19(5):522-526. 

In This Article

Conclusion

Stigma is both a proximate and a distal cause of employment inequity for people with a mental disability who experience direct discrimination because of prejudicial attitudes from employers and workmates and indirect discrimination owing to historical patterns of disadvantage, structural disincentives against competitive employment and generalized policy neglect. Against this background, modern mental health rehabilitation models and legislative philosophies, which focus on citizenship rights and full social participation, are to be welcomed. Yet, recent findings demonstrate that the legislation remains vulnerable to the very prejudicial attitudes they are intended to abate. Research conducted during the past year continues to highlight the multiple attitudinal and structural barriers that prevent people with mental disabilities from becoming active participants in the competitive labour market.

References

Papers of particular interest, published within the annual period of review, have been highlighted as:

* of special interest
** of outstanding interest

Additional references related to this topic can also be found in the Current World Literature section in this issue (p. 550).

  1. Corrigan PW. Mental health stigma as social attribution: implications for research methods and attitude change. Clin Psychol Sci Pract 2000; 7: 48-67.

  2. Link B, Phelan JC. Conceptualizing stigma. Annu Rev Sociol 2001; 27: 363-385.

  3. Sartorius N. Iatrogenic stigma of mental illness. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 324: 1470-1471.

  4. Sartorius N, Schulze H. Reducing stigma due to mental illness: a report from a global program of the World Psychiatric Association. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.
    ** This article is a compendium of the models and approaches to stigma used by the World Psychiatric Association's global programme to reduce stigma because of schizophrenia, summarizing the results from more than 20 countries.

  5. Arboleda-Flórez J. Stigma and discrimination: an overview. World Psychiatry 2005; 4 (Suppl 1):8-10.
    * An overview of the social and historical roots and current manifestations of stigma and discrimination related to mental illness.

  6. Becker DR, Drake RE, Naughton WJ. Supported employment for people with co-occurring disorders. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2005; 28:332-338.

  7. Ackerman GW, McReynolds CJ. Strategies to promote successful employment of people with psychiatric disabilities. J Appl Rehabil Couns 2005; 36: 35-40.

  8. Morgan G. We want to be able to work. Mental Health Today October 2005; 32-34.

  9. Marrone JF, Follwy S, Selleck V. How mental health and welfare to work interact: the role of hope, sanctions, engagement, and support. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil 2005; 8:81-101.

  10. Bell S. What does the 'right to health' have to offer mental health patients? Int J Law Psychiatry 2005; 28:141-153.

  11. World Health Organization. The World Health report 2001 - mental health: new understanding and hope. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.

  12. Sartorius N. The World Psychiatric Association global programme against stigma and discrimination because of schizophrenia. In: Crisp AH, editor. Every family in the land [revised edition]. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press; 2004. pp. 373-375.

  13. Marcias CLT, DeCario Q, Wang J, et al. Work interest as a predictor of competitive employment: policy implications for psychiatric rehabilitation. Adm Policy Ment Health 2001; 28:279-297.

  14. Cook JA, Leff HS, Blyler CR, et al. Results of a multisite randomized trial of supported employment interventions for individuals with severe mental illness. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005; 62:505-512.
    * A randomized controlled trial of 1273 outpatients with severe mental illness from seven states in the United States showing the effectiveness of supported employment programmes in helping participants achieve competitive employment.

  15. Crowther RE, Marchall M, Bond GR, et al. Helping people with severe mental illness to obtain work: systematic review. BMJ 2001; 322:204-208.

  16. Sanderson K, Andrews G. Common mental disorders in the workforce: recent findings from descriptive and social epidemiology. Can J Psychiatry 2006; 51:63-75.
    * A structured literature review of studies describing the prevalence of mental disorders in working populations showing the high burden associated with depression and anxiety disorders.

  17. Murphy AA, Mullen MG, Spagnolo B. Enhancing individual placement and support: promoting job tenure by integrating natural supports and supported education. Am J Psychiatr Rehabil 2005; 8:37-61.
    ** A clear and comprehensive discussion of the limitations of supported employment programmes for achieving job tenure, which casts significant doubt on the effectiveness of these programmes in helping people with mental disorders develop sustainable jobs in the primary labour market.

  18. Long E, Runch B. Combating stigma through work for the mentally restored. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1983; 34:19-20.

  19. Scheid TL. Employment of individuals with mental disabilities: business response to the ADA's challenge. Behav Sci Law 1999; 17:73-91.

  20. Manning C, White PD. Attitudes of employers to the mentally ill. Psychiatr Bull 1995; 19:541-543.

  21. Paetzold RL. Mental illness and reasonable accommodations at work: definition of a mental disability under the ADA. Psychiatr Serv 2005; 56: 1188-1190.
    * A legal analysis of court rulings under the Americans with Disability Act showing the difficulty associated with demonstrating that mental disorders constitute disabilities under the definition of the act for purposes of acquiring workplace accommodations.

  22. Gaebel W, Bauman AE, Zäske H. Intervening in a multilevel network: progress of the German Open the Doors projects. World Psychiatry 2005; 4 (Suppl 1): 16-20.
    * A comprehensive overview of the approaches and results of the German site of the World Psychiatric Association's global programme to fight stigma and discrimination due to schizophrenia.

  23. Roeloffs CC, Sherbourne J, Unützer A, et al. Stigma and depression among primary care patients. Gen Hosp Psychiatry 2003; 25:311-315.

  24. Wahl OF. Mental health consumers' experiences of stigma. Schizophr Bull 1999; 25:467-478.

  25. Wahl OF. Telling is risky business. Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press; 1999.

  26. Stuart H. Stigma and work. Healthc Pap 2004; 5:100-111.

  27. Link B. Mental patient status, work, and income: an examination of the effects of a psychiatric label. Am Sociol Rev 1982; 47:202-215.

  28. Nicholas G. Workplace effects on the stigmatization of depression. J Occup Environ Med 1998; 40:793-800.

  29. Rosenheck R, Leslie D, Keefe R, et al. Barriers to employment for people with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163:411-417.
    * This article presents a study of 1400 patients with a diagnosis of schizophrenia who participated in a multisite drug trial showing that employment may be impeded by benefit traps associated with disability payments.

  30. Perkins DV, Born DL, Raines JA, et al. Program evaluation from an ecological perspective: supported employment services for persons with serious psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal 2005; 28:217-224.
    * This large-scale study of 4600 clients who used supported employment programmes in the state of Indiana examines effectiveness, client satisfaction with and costs of supported employment programmes.

  31. Catalano R, Drake RE, Becker DR, et al. Labour market conditions and employment of the mentally ill. J Ment Health Policy Econ 1999; 2:51-54.

  32. Clark RE, Dain BJ, Zie H, et al. The economic benefits of supported employment for persons with mental illness. J Ment Health Policy 1998; 1:63-71.

  33. Chandler D, Meisel J, Jordan P, et al. Mental health, employment, and welfare tenure. J Community Psychol 2005; 33:587-609.
    * This article presents a study of 632 recipients of temporary assistance for needy families in California showing that those with mental health problems are less likely to work and to work fewer hours per week, even after the implementation of welfare-to-work policies.

  34. Corrigan PW, McCracken SG. Place first, then train: an alternative to the medical model of psychiatric rehabilitation. Social Work 2005; 50:31-39.
    * This article provides a good overview of competing rehabilitation models of supported employment emphasizing the effectiveness of models that fast-track employment placements.

  35. Cook JA, Lehman AF, Drake R, et al. Integration of psychiatric and vocational services: a multisite randomized, controlled trial of supported employment. Am J Psychiatry 2005; 162:1948-1956.
    * Results of a randomized trial involving 1273 people with severe mental illness at seven sites in the United States showing the effectiveness of integrated psychiatric and vocational service delivery models on employment outcomes.

  36. Schulze B, Angermeyer MC. Subjective experiences of stigma. A focus group study of schizophrenia patients, their relatives and mental health professionals. Soc Sci Med 2003; 56:299-312.

  37. Becker DR, Drake RE, Bond GR, et al. Job terminations among persons with severe mental illness participating in supported employment. Community Ment Health J 1998; 34:71-82.

  38. Zhang M, Rost KM, Fortney JC, Smith GR. A community study of depression treatment and employment earnings. Psychiatr Serv 1999; 59:1209-1213.

  39. Harnois G, Bagriel P. Mental health and work: impact, issues and good practices. Geneva: World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization; 2000.

  40. Mercer Human Resource Consulting Group. Few Canadian employers addressing workplace mental health issues; 2004. http://www.mercerhr.com/pressrelease/details.jhtml/dynamic/idContent/1148145. [Accessed 2 March 2005]

  41. Gray P. Mental health in the workplace: tackling the effects of stress. London, UK: The Mental Health Foundation; 2000.

  42. Tsutsumi A, Takao S, Mineyama S, et al. Effects of a supervisory education for positive mental health the workplace: a quasi-experimental study. J Occup Health 2005; 47:226-235.
    * A study showing that mental health education for supervisors improves mental health outcomes in workers but only in areas where one third or more of the supervisory personnel participated in the educational programme.

  43. Spicer RS, Miller TR. Impact of a workplace peer-focused substance abuse prevention and early intervention program. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2005; 29: 609-611.
    * A study demonstrating the impact of a peer intervention programme for substance abuse on workplace injuries.

  44. Lunt N, Thornton P. disability and employment: towards an understanding of discourse and policy. Disabil Soc 1994; 9:223-238.

  45. Roulstone A, Warren J. Applying a barriers approach to monitoring disabled people's employment: implications for the Disability Discrimination Act 2005. Disabil Soc 2006; 21:1125-1131.
    ** An excellent overview of the rationale behind the UK Disability Discrimination Act of 2005 highlighting how the act subscribes to a social model of disability and the importance of disability employment monitoring.

  46. Commission of the European Communities. Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European parliament, The European Economic and Social Committee and The Committee of the Regions. Equal opportunities for people with disabilities: a European Action Plan. Brussels; 2003.

  47. Goss D, Goss F, Adam-Smith D. Disability and employment: a comparative critique of UK legislation. Int J Hum Resour Manag 2000; 11:807-821.

  48. Vilchinsky N, Findler L. Attitudes toward Israel's Equal Rights for People with Disabilities Law: a multiperspective approach. Rehabil Psychol 2004; 49:309-316.

  49. Heijbel B, Josephson M, Jensen I, Vingärd E. Employer, insurance, and health system response to long-term sick leave in the public sector: policy implications. J Occup Rehabil 2005; 15:167-176.
    * A survey of worker sick leave in Sweden with the expressed purpose of showing that employers have failed to comply with explicit requirements of employment equity legislation.

  50. Allbright AL. 2004 employment decisions under the ADA Title I - survey update. Ment Phys Disabil Law Rep 2005; 29:513-516.
    * A review of employment decisions under the Americans with Disabilities Act providing figures on the outcome of decisions for claimants with mental disabilities.

  51. Goldberg SG, Killeen MB, O'Day B. The disclosure conundrum: how people with psychiatric disabilities navigate employment. Psychol Public Policy Law 2005; 11:463-500.
    * This qualitative study outlines different forms of disability disclosure points to the ad-hoc nature of most decisions and the lack of professional mental health and rehabilitation input.

  52. MacDonald-Wilson KL. Managing disclosure of psychiatric disabilities to employers. J Appl Rehabil Couns 2005; 36:11-21.
    ** A comprehensive review of the disclosure literature outlining the risks and benefits that must be considered in making such a decision. Two step-by-step guides are offered for professionals wishing to help clients work through the process of disclosure.

Comments

3090D553-9492-4563-8681-AD288FA52ACE
Comments on Medscape are moderated and should be professional in tone and on topic. You must declare any conflicts of interest related to your comments and responses. Please see our Commenting Guide for further information. We reserve the right to remove posts at our sole discretion.
Post as:

processing....