Wake-up call for British psychiatry

Department of Psychological Medicine, Medical School, Cardiff University, Heath Park, Cardiff, UK.
The British Journal of Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 7.34). 08/2008; 193(1):6-9. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.108.053561
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The recent drive within the UK National Health Service to improve psychosocial care for people with mental illness is both understandable and welcome: evidence-based psychological and social interventions are extremely important in managing psychiatric illness. Nevertheless, the accompanying downgrading of medical aspects of care has resulted in services that often are better suited to offering non-specific psychosocial support, rather than thorough, broad-based diagnostic assessment leading to specific treatments to optimise well-being and functioning. In part, these changes have been politically driven, but they could not have occurred without the collusion, or at least the acquiescence, of psychiatrists. This creeping devaluation of medicine disadvantages patients and is very damaging to both the standing and the understanding of psychiatry in the minds of the public, fellow professionals and the medical students who will be responsible for the specialty's future. On the 200th birthday of psychiatry, it is fitting to reconsider the specialty's core values and renew efforts to use psychiatric skills for the maximum benefit of patients.

Download full-text


Available from: John R Geddes, Jul 04, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 10/2013; 47(12). DOI:10.1177/0004867413510053
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Diagnosis in psychiatry is portrayed as the same type of activity as diagnosis in other areas of medicine. However, the notion that psychiatric conditions are equivalent to physical diseases has been contested for several decades. In this paper, I use the work of Jeff Coulter and David Ingelby to explore the role of diagnosis in routine psychiatric practice. Coulter examined the process of identification of mental disturbance and suggested that it was quite different from the process of identifying a physical disease, as it was dependent on social norms and circumstances. Ingelby pointed out that it was the apparent medical nature of the process that enabled it to act as a justification for the actions that followed. I describe the stories of two patients, which illustrate the themes Ingelby and Coulter identified. In particular they demonstrate that, in contrast to the idea that diagnosis should determine treatment, diagnoses in psychiatry are applied to justify predetermined social responses, designed to control and contain disturbed behaviour and provide care for dependents. Hence psychiatric diagnosis functions as a political device employed to legitimate activities that might otherwise be contested.
    Social Theory & Health 11/2010; DOI:10.1057/sth.2009.11
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Psychiatry in the UK is seemingly moving inexorably towards bureau-medicalisation, a potent combination of the medical model and organisational imperative. This paper looks at the causes of these developments and one consequent trajectory toward a generic mental health practitioner. This paper provides a rationale for mental health social work (MHSW), arguing against the temptation to modernise mental health care by seeing the demise of MHSW and creating a generic mental health practitioner. A case is made for the unique role of the mental health social worker, requiring a redefinition of MHSW. Because of the profound changes in the National Health Service, we propose that, far from moving to a world of the generic mental health practitioner, MHSW has a key role to play in providing a challenge to this monolithic structure, through having a double identification with both the institution it represents and representing the service users' relationship to that institution. No other professional body carries this unique role.
    Journal of Social Work Practice 03/2010; 24(1):15-28. DOI:10.1080/02650530903415672