Skip to main content

Top down Mental Health

I have just sent this mail:

Hello all (Pauline, can you please forward this mail to Abraham).

This attached policy has just come to my notice (scanned front page image only):



The document came to me via the mental health trust Service User Council but, 0n the surface, it looks like it has been presented to the SU Council as a fait accompli. Nowhere does it say that their Service Users had been consulted in the planning and development of the policy. There is certainly no mention of service users in the `Key Inter-Agency Personnel` list inside the document.

More pertinently to us, nowhere in this document is there any reference to pan-disability or the Police, MH trust, or County Council Disability Equality Schemes, or to any consultation with pan-disability service users - particularly the Constabulary/Police Authority Disability Equality Duty Forum!!

Additionally, the document, dated February 2008 and to be reviewed February 2009 makes only one brief mention of the Mental Health Act 2007 which will be implemented (in most of its measures) in October 2008. Especially in the light of the government's recent decision to defer the advocacy measures, it is IMPERATIVE that service users are involved and consulted in ALL policies of this kind.

In the Interagency list, the police contacts are:

Inspector Brian Pincher, Norfolk Constabulary;
Paul Loveday, Criminal Services Unit Manager for Suffolk Constabulary.

In the Community Cohesion and Diversity External Group we have just started to discuss preparations for the implications of the disability aspects of the Mental Health Act 2007, yet there has been no mention of this document. It seems that is is not only the community that needs cohesion!!!

In my opinion, the document should be immediately withdrawn and consultations involving service users with pan-disability begun as soon as possible.

Heddwch

Mike.


I suspect policies like this are still being made top-down in this way. The message nationally is - IT IS WRONG - YOU MUST, IN LINE WITH THE DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION ACT 2005, ACTIVELY INVOLVE AND CONSULT SERVICE USERS.

Comments

Andy Robinson said…
You are quite right Mike this is still happening almost everywhere. The top brass have not fully understood or taken on board what the act requires. My local councillors for example were briefed on the requirements of the DED by the civil servants who will be carrying out the duties. What exactly have they been told? Why was no one else consulted or asked their opinion?
8 February 2008 at 11:09
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...
Post a Comment
Read more

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...
2 comments
Read more

inappropriate!!!

I tried to respond to a Patient Citizen Exchange blog by Laura Greene today. I said: Hello Laura. Welcome - and my admiration? for you "single-handedly representing the entire health voluntary sector and 1000+ PCX membership..." My first question has to be: what is the composition of the Strategic Advisory Board? And my second question: what proportion of service users to professionals is there on that Board? There are indeed millions of impatient citizens out there. They are called Service Users (primarily because 'Patient" carries the labels 'One that has things done to her/him'; 'One that is subservient to the "We know what is best for you" approach'; 'One that is at the wrong end of an imbalance of power.' etc). The Americans prefer the term 'consumers', but whatever, we should avoid the term with the negative connotations. I was listening to the 5 Live debate this morning on the Strictly Come Dancing row about whether...
3 comments
Read more