Letter: Victims of prejudice

Cedwyn Haulfield
Thursday 29 July 1999 00:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: Dorothy Rowe (Medical Notes, 27 July) is spot on about the negative career effects of seeking or receiving medical help for "psychological distress", and the enduring diagnostic labelling that can follow.

Additional negative effects include financial agreements such as credit purchases or loan agreements. These agreements include, not unreasonably, clauses which nullify any insurance against illness causing loss of earnings, if that illness has caused you to seek medical treatment or advice in the preceding twelve months.

However, if such loss of earnings involves anything that is labelled as psychiatric or psychological in origin, your insurance is invalidated if you have ever sought or been given treatment or advice, whether or not it is related to the reason that your earnings have been affected.

Also, it seems to be widely acknowledged that carrying a label of "long- term psychiatric diagnosis" has a very negative effect on an individual's credit rating.

Instead of "Not clinical wisdom but simple prejudice", perhaps the title of the piece should have been "Not clinical wisdom but complex institutionalised prejudice".

CEDWYN HAULFIELD

Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in