Sainsburys disability discrimination

BorisThomson wrote: »

Mental health services in this country are appalling. You're criticising the OP for stating a fact.

Yes that may be the case, but I am also reminded that the services are free/subsidised and that OP appears to be receiving at least *some* support. If your default position in that situation is to criticise the whole service then go private.

It pains me to say this, but it sort of is a case of "be grateful for what you have". Not right, but better than nothing/forking out money.

If someone had a rant because they couldn't access cancer services would you lose all sympathy and tell them to go private?

Well, I lost sympathy more due to the wider context and the Sainsburys issue.

I might well lose sympathy in similar circumstances with a cancer patient. Then again, cancer is generally progressive, more common and more life threatening so I'd expect that the services will be much better (to the point where a fair number of services not offered by the NHS would fall into the "rare" category).

So yea, I probably would tell a cancer patient in similar circumstances to go private. Only the "sympathy" element is up for debate really.

Your frustration should be aimed at Jeremy Hunt and the government that are doing their best to decimate the NHS, not people trying to access much needed help.

Aye it should be, but in this case *some* treatment is better than *none*

BorisThomson wrote: »

Your post demonstrates the ignorance around mental health. Be in no doubt that, when we're talking about a condition to the extent that the OP describes, it can kill. Each time it does, the NHS investigates and tells us it has made improvements, but in reality nothing changes, even if they wanted to the funds are not there.

Ok, if you think that then fine

Often *some* care is as bad or worse than none at all, it opens the patient up to the hope of treatment and getting better, and then when that hope is removed the patient is even worse than when they first asked for help. Or they're stuck on drugs that turn them into a zombie, but that's seen as a success because the initial problem no longer presents.

Interesting point there. Do you have any evidence to back that up like? Something which shows that *some* care can actually be more detrimental than *no* care? Believe it or not but I'm actually asking from an academic and open-minded viewpoint, not necessarily to catch you out.

If you are merely guessing then I will be bitterly disappointed though, because it would be worse than had you just not said it...

(I'm not using the term ignorance in an offensive sense, but rather that people don't comprehend just how debilitating mental illness can be, and how poor treatment can actually make things far, far worse.)

I do understand how debilitating mental illness can be (both personally and academically). I just choose to use elements of the NHS and other support groups to help overcome it, and try not to slag off either of them for the services they provide*

*that being said, the OCD in OP's case seems to be more profound than most and I did provide a link very early on in the thread to Sectioning, which may be the next step to discuss with the NHS.