Why Employees Who Have Experienced ACEs Can Be Bad for Business

Thanks for your comment and for sharing the article, Susan.

I also agree with  the previous comments - regarding the potential for perpetuating stigma and potential to adversely impact employees.  When you combine rising health insurance costs, workplace policies and a vulnerable population - screening for a "condition" whether it be ACEs, or genetic testing - the worry is workplace discrimination and insurance discrimination.  Having read your full article, I'm still concerned because despite our best intentions to help inform, there are people holding positions of power in the workplace and insurance that do not operate in ethical or moral standards when it comes to mental health or genetic pre-disposition.  I don't want employers or insurers to require ACES screening.  There are current debates about how our anti-discrimination laws can be updated regarding genetic testing, perhaps ACEs is another protection to include for workers.  This article is worth reading - https://journals.lww.com/co-ps...scrimination.14.aspx

Cathy, Dennis, and Jane,

I appreciate the important concerns you've raised in your comments. I think I've addressed some of them in the revisions I've made to the source (full) article linked above, "Workplace Impacts of Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs)."

Thank you,

Lisa

The title of this article is disturbing. I don’t think anyone needs a negative label and “prediction” of their ability. The science tells us the negative impacts of ACES can be mitigated. That is where our focus must be. It is imperative for all members of our communities understand what an adverse childhood experience is, but MORE importantly how resilience is formed. Additionally, it is not necessary to know a colleague or employees ACE score of poor performance is occurring it is more important to provide access to employee assistance programs (EAP), coaching, and strength based - servant leadership. We don’t need another reason to tell someone why they can’t be successful. ~ Cathy

I agree. However my experience has been that it takes time for people to learn.

I have been and am working towards that goal. We are not there. And until we get there we need to take steps to protect vulnerable people.

It's only the dark side if businesses don't embrace that most people have ACEs, no matter what the demographic. That's why it's useful for this movement to help create an environment where organizations examine their own burden of ACEs, and to learn how they can create a workplace where people heal instead of being further traumatized. In the organizations that take this approach, they create a healthier workplace where workers thrive and do their best work.

This is the dark side of ACEs. We are talking about the potential use of ACEs to screen out employees and healthcare applicants. We already know from Feletti and Anda's work that high ACEs can lead to a greater incidence of many illnesses.

We also know that these are not choices. However, employers and others can use ACEs test data to discriminate against people who are or might become physically or mentally disabled. I have run a mental health advocacy agency and I am gravely concerned about these possible uses of ACEs.

Make no mistake people who are concerned about profits are also reading this site. They will have an incentive to work ACEs tests into employment screenings.

Individuals who have been able to ameliorate the effects of ACEs will also be subject to this discrimination.

There needs to be an effort to create resources for individuals under the ADA to challenge these potential actions.

 I would like to know if anybody is working on these issues?  Do protective precedents already exist?