Blogging about mental health issues
Each week we publish blog posts on a whole range of topics, relating in some way to mental health — written by Mind staff, service users and health and policy professionals. Some blog posts may not reflect official Mind policy.
We welcome comments and questions on our posts, but have a few ground rules to keep the site welcoming and interesting to every body. The first rule is the most important: be respectful of other commenters and bloggers.
General election:
-
13 May 2010
What does the coalition mean for mental health?So the dust has (somewhat) settled, we have apparently entered into a new era of politics, and we’ve witnessed a rather surreal yet mesmerizing press conference in Downing Street garden, complete with birdsong.
A coalition government will no doubt bring additional stresses and strains than a traditional majority government would have - maybe they should sign up to our ‘Taking care of business’ campaign on mental health in the workplace for free tips on improving wellbeing and ensuring productivity!But what this two-tone Government will mean for mental health is yet to be seen. Both Cameron and Clegg have signed up to our anti-stigma and discrimination campaign Time to Change. Both parties also committed to improving access to talking treatments in their recent manifestos. However, since the coalition was formed, very little has been said about health policy or the NHS. New Health Secretary Andrew Lansley has repeated the commitment to increase NHS spending in line with inflation. Yet, at the same time the need for efficiency savings has been heavily stressed.
What is far more worrying is the commitment to move further and faster on welfare reform, as outlined in the coalition agreement. Most striking is the commitment to immediately refer claimants on Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) who are facing the “most significant barriers to work” to a newly created welfare to work programme. This is despite wide recognition (from the charity sector at least), that the process which forms the bedrock of claimants’ assessments is fundamentally broken.
Let’s not forget, these are tough economic times and the recession has taken its toll on the mental health of the population. Now more than ever it’s vital that people are able to access the treatment and services which can help them towards recovery and enable them to remain in work or return to employment in the right way and at the right time.
What is crystal clear is that this coming Parliament will be extremely difficult both politically and economically. It will require hard work, determination, and resilient leadership to ensure that the right decisions, not the easy decisions, are made around mental health. Now that will be the true test of Cameron and Clegg’s claims to have created a new era of politics.
Vicki Nash, Head of Policy and Campaigns
1 Comment -
6 May 2010
Political parent, psychiatric patientCross-posted at Political Parent
Today, election day, I am facing my 16th day as a psychiatric inpatient. It's been a very different and difficult 16 days.
There's no need for me to go into the medical reasons why I'm here, I'm safer here, it's better for my children if I am here. It's not the kind of place I would choose to be.
My mental health took a significant turn for the worse and I'm waiting for modern medicine and the system to patch me up sufficiently so I can return home and start rebuilding my shattered life.
I knew very little about this side of mental healthcare provision and again I am ashamed at the state some parts of it are in. Everyday I get the same message from staff - "we'd like to do X /Y/Z but we're too busy/short of staff". In fact I am all to aware of the pressures the staff here face and at times I feel like an inconvenience.
From time to time, when I dare to think one day I might be able to cope with the relative stress of going out alone, living in my own house, managing my own pain in a healing and healthy way, I plan my future and the changes I think I could make to the perception and treatment of mental health in society. I also have a number of letters already mentally written to Ms Sturgeon. When I'm well enough she'll be sick of the sight of me.
At this stage I struggle to be witty at all but I have designed a range of T-shirts including one with "do I look like the cabinet secretary for health?" written on it.
Today is going to be difficult for me, you all know how hard I worked in the past but for this election I have been largely absent. It's easier for me to pretend it's just not happening.
I do not know what I'm going to do today, I don't know whether I can face watching election coverage on TV – I've hidden from news in all formats for at least 16 days. I've steered clear of Twitter and Facebook and put myself in an electionless bubble. It'll be the first election night I haven't spent at a count or sat up, feet aching, glued to the TV.
I nearly lost my right to vote yesterday but after considering my future career (whatever that is) the psychiatrist decided to hold off. The truth is I don't think I can vote, not for somebody else, not in "my" seat. I am ashamed to even say it but in terms of a triggering event I can't imagine anything more difficult than going to the polling station and putting an X next to where my name should've been and could've been had others shown the enduring loyalty I often extend to others.
So I will keep myself occupied today agonising over whether I think I can use my right to vote and vote for someone else in my seat in my election.
I wish everyone well for today, especially Labour comrades. I wish I was out there with you, I wish I was who I was but I hope that this episode will have made a new improved version and I hope to unleash her on the world soon.
So I will now go back to being the patient, I hope to 'return to the community' before my birthday in June. but in the meantime would like readers to shower me with friendly messages on twitter @zoe_smith
I'm not sure that I'm the only person who cannot predict the outcome of today, from the snippets of news that sneaks in off the soles of visitors shoes it's all a bit up in the air. I'm too up in the air myself to care much. I hope we win but I know if we don't I'm ready for a fight, well, almost ready.Guest blogger Zoe Smith
3 Comments -
29 April 2010
Welfare? What welfare?Last week the Conservative party published its new welfare contract, which sets out their plans to deal with worklessness. Under the mantra of “ending the free ride for those who fail to take responsibility”, the Conservatives promise more support for those who need it, but far stronger sanctions for those who abuse it. The Labour party has made remarkably similar pledges in its own manifesto, while the Liberal Democrats have so far been fairly quiet on welfare.
I find it strange that this topic, which is of such importance to millions of people, barely got a look-in in the national press last week. The election coverage has been dominated by talk of the national deficit, the recession, and unemployment levels, yet the flip side of this – benefits and welfare – have been largely ignored.
Why? Well, I don’t know, but my fear is that it’s because there is already a sense of agreement on this issue: politicians and journalists across the spectrum are united in the belief that it’s time to “get tough on benefit scroungers”. And where there is consensus, there is no need for debate.
Except that there isn’t consensus. Mind, for one, doesn’t think it’s so straight forward, and we know from our work with the Disability Benefits Consortium that many other health charities share our concerns about this worryingly distorted view of benefit claimants. Over 40 per cent of incapacity benefit claimants are unable to work because of mental health problems. The belief that this group of people should simply ‘pull its socks up and stop scrounging off the state’ is dangerously ill informed.
The fact is, many people with mental health problems do wish to return to work, but need a good deal of support to do so - support that is rarely offered. It seems grossly unfair to use sanctions and benefit cuts to push people into employment before they are ready, and without any of the necessary support. Add to that the current shortage of jobs, as well as employers' discriminatory attitudes to people with mental health problems, and you have an uphill struggle all the way.
Both Labour and the Conservatives want to get tough by reassessing all incapacity benefit claimants, using the Work Capability Assessment (we don’t know the Lib Dem plans yet). Those who are deemed ‘fit for work’ will be moved onto Jobseekers Allowance, which provides less support, less money and more sanctions. But given that charities including Mind have questioned the efficacy of that test for nearly two years, this seems a little premature to say the least.
So the nightmare scenario is this: agencies that are inclined to be sceptical of claimants will reassess their benefit needs, using a dodgy test, and then send them out to find jobs that don’t exist, without adequate support. It’s not ideal.
Welfare reform is a complicated and emotive issue, and one that deserves far more attention than it has so far received. Be sure to do your bit before May 6th and raise it in any way you can.
Louise Kirsh, Parliamentary Officer
33 Comments -
19 April 2010
Why I choked on my breakfast cereal this morning...Get involved
•Ask your MP and parliamentary candidates how they are going to improve access to talking therapies
•Tell us about your experiences of talking therapiesRegular visitors to our news and blog pages will know that we’ve recently celebrated the manifesto hat-trick scored by the We Need to Talk campaign. All three major political parties have used their manifestos to pledge to improve the provision of psychological therapies. As Paul Farmer’s latest blog post argues, we should definitely see these commitments as a great step forward – we’ve achieved a consensus from all the main parties that access to psychological therapies needs to get better.
You could therefore forgive me for choking on my breakfast cereal this morning as I turned to page 13 of The Times and read this. According to this article, 40 mental health foundation trusts have been singled out for bigger cuts than any other area – the cuts equate to a reduction of an extra £50 million!
Although we all have to appreciate that funds are tight and savings will need to be made in the NHS, it is unjust that yet again mental health services are seen as an easy target when it should be thought of as anything but. As we know, one in four people experience mental distress throughout their lives and there is no reason why they should accept a reduced service any more than those needing physical health services.
These proposed cuts show more clearly than ever that a pledge alone is not enough – we need action. Although I remain encouraged by the parties’ commitments to improve access to psychological therapies, we must keep up the pressure to ensure that words turn into deeds. You can help us achieve this by getting involved in our election campaign. When candidates come to your door, ask a mental health question – just what would they do to improve access to psychological therapies in your area? And don’t forget to take our survey on your experiences. Only by working together can we consign treating mental health services as a “soft option” for cuts to the waste bucket of history.
Mariam Kemple is a Policy and Campaigns Officer at Mind
2 Comments -
16 April 2010
What do the party manifestos mean for mental health?
This week, the election campaign is fully under way as we see the parties launch their manifestos. It's probably the best indication of where mental health sits as a priority for a new Government.
The signs are encouraging, with some recurring themes. The Labour manifesto promises to increase the number of therapists (although makes no promises on reducing waiting times), and makes a clear commitment to tackle stigma.
There's also commitment to the mental health of ex-servicemen, and support for people looking for work. Labour Election Co-Ordinator Douglas Alexander defended his party's commitment to increasing the number of therapists on the Radio 4 PM programme on 12 April (this is available to listen to until Monday 19 April. You can hear the discussion 17 minutes in to the broadcast).
The Conservatives too support an increase in talking treatments, and plan to improve services for veterans. Their manifesto also addresses work issues for people who are long-term unemployed.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats, as well as sharing support for more therapists, outline an increase in mental health funding which in turn generates a long term saving to the economy under Vince Cable's stewardship.
So far so good. But all make reference to tough times ahead, and we are already hearing of some mental health services threatened with cutbacks, particularly in London
So what does this all mean?
First of all, this election appears to be extremely close. There's a chance for all of us to influence the outcome, and to quiz candidates on their views on mental health, so I'd encourage as many people as possible to engage with candidates, and vote.Politics doesn't exactly have a great reputation at the moment, but we can all influence that. Just ten years ago, Mind lobbied hard to change the law to give psychiatric inpatients the right to vote in a general election. It's vital that this right is upheld – so as a first step, make sure you register to vote by 20 April.
Secondly, it's a credit to our We Need to Talk partners that there's widespread recognition of the need for further development of access to talking treatments, and much needed at a time when funding cuts could threaten this.
It is clear that mental health is now recognised by all three parties as an important issue, and one which could emerge as a touchstone in a new Government. The way society treats this issue should be a litmus test for good government.
Let the campaign continue!Paul Farmer, Chief Executive
5 Comments -
24 March 2010
Stamping out dirty election tacticsI joined MPs and leaders from the mental health world on 22 March at the launch of the first ‘mental health election compact’.In the glitzy surroundings of Speakers House, we celebrated another step forward in the battle against stigma and discrimination – this time focusing on the behaviour of MPs during the run up to the general election.
The compact effectively bans politicians from making slurs about opponents’ mental health while campaigning. Those who sign promise not to make discriminatory comments to score political advantage, and to challenge ‘canteen culture harassment’ which sees negative comments made in the course of everyday conversation. Mind, along with other mental health organisations, has been lobbying for months to make this happen, and we are delighted that Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have all signed up.
In an ideal world, such a compact wouldn’t be necessary in the first place. As Mr Speaker pointed out at the event, politicians wouldn’t dream of referring to their opponents’ gender, race, sexuality or physical health in their election campaigning. So why should it be acceptable to make remarks, however subtle, about opponents’ mental health?
Of course, it’s not acceptable – but it does happen. Who can forget the car-crash of an interview in which Andrew Marr quizzed Gordon Brown about his mental state? And this was not a one-off; political blogs and websites on all sides are full of speculation and innuendo, and I have personally overheard many an inappropriate comment made, particularly after hours at the political party conferences. Let’s hope the compact helps stamp out this poor behaviour.And let’s also hope that it will go some way in encouraging new MPs to speak openly about their own mental health. As I’ve pointed out in previous blog posts, MPs are just as susceptible to mental health problems as the rest of us, but I could count on one hand the number that are willing to talk about it publicly.
At the event, comedienne Ruby Wax rightly pointed out (in a far wittier style) that voters need MPs they can relate to - people who have experienced the same things as them, and who represent them in the truest sense. So MPs that pretend to be immune to mental ill health serve neither themselves nor their constituents. With a bit of luck the next generation will be brave enough to recognise this.
Louise Kirsh, Parliamentary Officer
4 Comments -
4 March 2010
Do you Mind?Right, well this is my first venture into the blogosphere so be gentle with me, fellow bloggers.
Get involved: Do you know what to say if a candidate knocks on your door?After what seems like a lifetime of talk about elections, we are now only 10 weeks away from the general election, expected on Thursday 6 May 2010. To mark the final countdown Mind has launched our Do you Mind? general election campaign.
If opinion polls are to be believed, this election will be the tightest in recent memory. Last week polls put the Conservatives at a nine point advantage over Labour, but a recent poll over the weekend closed that gap to a mere two-point lead.
Over the past year, I’ve been in meetings with representatives from the three main political parties who have all agreed with Mind that mental health is on a tipping point which could see a permanent and lasting break through into mainstream public policy and politics. We’ve also had lots of nods of agreement about the need to make sure the lessons of the past recession are not repeated and we don’t see another generation consigned to the wasteland of long-term unemployment.
While these developments and nods of support are to be welcomed, now is the time for us to see the meat on the bone and for politicians and the plethora of candidates pounding the doorsteps up and down the country to essentially put their money where their mouths are.
With so many MPs standing down and marginal seats likely to change hands, this expected intake of new MPs will be huge. Rather like us campaigners, most people enter politics to change the world for the better – we simply choose different routes. We don't always agree, and it can take years and millions of people like you speaking up and making yourself heard. But when we do come to see eye to eye, those agreements can bring about real and lasting change to society and for individuals.
So when those candidates come knocking at your door, take the time to really press them about their own attitudes and views on mental health and what they will do to make a positive difference. Let’s make sure we elect a group of MPs who will lead the way in challenging stigmatising and discriminatory attitudes and behaviours to mental health, not add to them. It’s not much to ask for is it?Novice blogger Vicki Nash is Mind's Head of Policy and Campaigns
6 Comments