Ehh... I haven't yet read the comments on your previous post yet, but...
There are certain jobs where psychiatric history is considered important. For any job involving national security, a psychiatric history or taking psychoactive medication is considered a liability, even if it's no longer current.
I think the problem comes from the gray realm of defining "qualified" and how fuzzy it becomes in the realm of mental health and how it affects functional capacity.
After all, should a psychiatric history that includes in overly aggressive tendencies be considered a disqualifying factor for say, a police officer? What if there is no psychiatric history, but simply in the course of the interview, the interviewer feels that the candidate is overly aggressive and confrontational and lacks personal skills?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2004-08-20 02:23 pm (UTC)There are certain jobs where psychiatric history is considered important. For any job involving national security, a psychiatric history or taking psychoactive medication is considered a liability, even if it's no longer current.
I think the problem comes from the gray realm of defining "qualified" and how fuzzy it becomes in the realm of mental health and how it affects functional capacity.
After all, should a psychiatric history that includes in overly aggressive tendencies be considered a disqualifying factor for say, a police officer? What if there is no psychiatric history, but simply in the course of the interview, the interviewer feels that the candidate is overly aggressive and confrontational and lacks personal skills?