Info Availible to COs

I'm pretty sure that was the case in the past. I don't know whether things have changed in the military with all the privacy laws. Puma

quixote100104 said:

Greetings ,

Does anyone out there know if psychological profile information is routinely made available to commanding officers in the military on their subordinates? If, say, they had had psychological issues/treatment, etc.

On the one hand, this is a privacy issue of course but, on the other, one could argue that a CO would need to know any potential issues.

Thanks ,

Click to expand...

I say he's not allowed to have it. Privacy still has to account for something after all!

Oh, and his nutter of a psychologist shouldn't get it either!

Rabe...

quixote100104 said:

Greetings ,

Does anyone out there know if psychological profile information is routinely made available to commanding officers in the military on their subordinates? If, say, they had had psychological issues/treatment, etc.

On the one hand, this is a privacy issue of course but, on the other, one could argue that a CO would need to know any potential issues.

Thanks ,

Click to expand...

I say he's not allowed to have it. Privacy still has to account for something after all!

Oh, and his nutter of a psychologist shouldn't get it either!

Okay...I've been thinking about this. I don't know about military.

However, there could be an argument made on a 'fitness for duty' evaluation whereby the person is sent to the evaluation and that information is then provided to both the individual and the organization. Especially any relevant diagnosis and any reasons why a diagnosis can't be made.

So, in short, if the organization is ordering the evaluation, I think there is a basis for them to be privy to that information. Which could include any bosses. Also - there are certain rights afforded to civilians that are not afforded to members of the military. I'm not sure how much medical information is protected under this system, but the SC has come back to say that members of the military - by design of it as a specialized and highly structured need for protection of the country - can restrict and ignore a lot of rights of individual members.

This can apply in your situation as well.

Rabe...

Short answer it depends. What is the need to know and what is the problem?

Anyone in the military and a psych problem knows better than to go to a military counselor because it is information that potentially will be shared.

Best of luck,

Jim Clark-Dawe

Not sure about today, but the commander used to have access to any information that might affect the ability for someone in his unit to perform their duties. The Privacy Act of 1975 severely restricted what personal information had to be protected.

Anyone with access to nuclear weapons was required to maintain a physical and mental profile intended to minimize the chance of compromising the security of those weapons. The commander would receive a report that provided that information, and it would be monitored by higher headquarters as an inspection item that affected unit readiness.

A commander also had the authority to send his people for mental evaluation if he thought there might be a problem. As Jim noted in his post, any career military person would do their best to avoid an interview with a psychologist or psychiatrist.

Privacy, medical or otherwise, only extends as far as where it affects commands ability to carry out its mission. The medical teams had no problem posting "Fat Man" lists, where people were put on probation until they reduced their body fat index. These people were singled out for special exercise periods at lunch time.
If there were phychological issues that affected the serviceman's performance, the CO would be notified.