How do you explain your disability?

[Crazy Cat]

Hello,

As I've posted here before, I'm on SS disability for depression, BPD, etc.

Lately I've had to deal with some financial people and others who, right or wrong, ask why I'm on disability. How do you answer them?

Most assume I'm physically disabled. I know its none of their business, but I don't want to be rude and say so. Plus I'm a pretty open person so I don't really much care what others think, but to say I have "mental problems" or as my husband says "mentally unable to work" seems like the wrong way to say it.

Then you meet people who look you over and assume you're cheating the "system" and faking a disability.

Anyone else with this problem?

 

[Daniel E.]

You may get some ideas here:

According to the Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law, if you decide to disclose you should determine how specific you want to be about your disability and provide additional information accordingly:

• Very general: refer to a medical condition or an illness.
• A little more specific: say that you have a biochemical imbalance, a neurological problem, a brain disorder, or difficulty with stress.
• Mention mental illness specifically: mental illness, a psychiatric disorder, or a mental disability.
• Give your exact diagnosis: clinical depression, panic disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, etc.

http://forum.psychlinks.ca/mental-h...-on-campus/8244-anxiety-in-the-workplace.html

 

[Retired]

some financial people and others who, right or wrong, ask why I'm on disability. How do you answer them?

I believe the answer should be determined strictly on a need to know basis. What nature of fincnacial people are inquiring? If it's an insurance company related to your claim, then obviously you need to disclose all the details, usually in a form that is mailed to you, a copy of which should always be retained for your future reference. I cannot see the need for your bank, your investment advisors or other financial connections for needing information about your health, unless I've missed something.

For public consumption such as social contacts, acquaintances and those on the fringe, simply saying you cannot work due to medical issues should be sufficient. If they persist, you can say, "I'd rather not discuss it". You are under no obligation to tell anyone anything you don't want to disclose.

Look at it this way; What if I asked you how much money do you have in the bank, how often do you make love and what's your annual income....you would, hopefully tell me it's none of my business.

Same thing about your personal medical information...it's none of anyone's business, unless they need to know...and those who have a legitimate need to know are very few.

 

[Daniel E.]

In other words:

Coming out at work [or to a close friend] is different than doing so with neighbors or fellow churchgoers. Given the list of possible consequences, opting to disclose and how to disclose are not transparent decisions that all people stigmatized with mental illness should pursue in a set manner. Rather, individuals should weigh the costs involved against the benefits...

We have been able to identify 4 levels of disclosure: social avoidance, secrecy, selective disclosure, and indiscriminant disclosure:

(1) Social Avoidance. One way to handle disclosure is to not tell anyone. This can be accomplished by avoiding situations where the public may find out about one's mental illness. People who are victimized by stigma may choose to not socialize with, live near, or work alongside persons without disabilities. They may prefer this kind of situation because they feel protected against people who might treat them cruelly because of their mental illness. Unfortunately, persons who choose to avoid the "normal" world lose out on all the benefits it can bring: free access to a broader set of opportunities and citizens who may be supportive of one's experience with mental illness. Moreover, social avoidance in some ways promotes stigma and discrimination, as it endorses the idea that persons with mental illness should be kept away from the rest of the world. Social avoidance may be a useful strategy during times when one's symptoms are intense and there is a need for respite from the demands of society. However, avoiding the "normal" world altogether will most likely prevent the achievement of life goals.

(2) Secrecy. Instead of avoiding work or community situations in order to keep one's experiences with mental illness private, many persons choose to enter the normal world but not share their experiences with others. They keep all aspects of their psychiatric experiences a secret -- both the impact of their illness and the interactions with the mental health system in its various manifestations. Some may argue that mental illness is readily apparent and can be inferred from a person's symptoms, dysfunctions, and disabilities; however, many of the experiences that are commonly associated with mental illness are not readily perceived and labeled by the public.

There are 2 strategies to keeping experiences with mental illness a secret. The first seems easy: Don't tell anyone. A person does not share a history of hospitalizations, doctors, medications, and symptoms. If the first strategy for keeping experiences secret is an act of omission, the second strategy is an act of commission. Whether or not to explain the gaps in a past and current experience, or the work resumes with blank years because of hospitalizations, or the photo albums that don't include pictures from the time when they were actively coping with their illness, becomes part of a decision about how to disclose their mental illness. Without explanations, these gaps may cause coworkers or neighbors to wonder about other things, such as, "Why do they leave early to see a doctor every month?" or "What are those medicines they take at lunch?"

(3) Selective Disclosure. Keeping experiences with mental illness a secret prevents a person from taking advantage of the support and resources that may be available to them when they do need to disclose. Hence, many people decide to disclose their experiences with mental illness to a select set of friends and acquaintances (Bradmiller MA, unpublished doctoral dissertation, 1997). Choosing to disclose to some people and not others has its risks; those who find out may shun them. However, with the risk comes opportunity: finding others who are supportive. A decision to disclose to someone does not mean one must tell everything; choosing to disclose does not mean giving up all of one's privacy. Just as people can decide whom they may wish to disclose to, they can also decide the content of the disclosure.

(4) Indiscriminant Disclosure. Selective disclosure means there are select groups of people with whom information is shared and groups from whom this information remains a secret. People who choose indiscriminant disclosure abandon secrecy altogether. They no longer worry who finds out about their mental illness or treatment history. People choosing this option are relieved of the burden posed by keeping part of their lives underground.

Despite its benefits, indiscriminant disclosure requires a fairly hardy personality. Many people who find out about the disclosed information may react negatively to the revelation. Hence, people opting for indiscriminant disclosure need to assess whether or not they can cope with the disapproval that can result from bigoted reactions.

Group Identity, Self-Disclosure, and the Self-Stigma of Mental Illness - Medscape