What could be different in mental health care, what helps, and what have you found to be useful reading?

[OwFriggingOw]

First off - this is a thread inspired by another thread - not about another thread.

I am a lecturer who teaches mainly MH nursing students, but also Adult, Child and Learning Disability field nurses about MH, and also occasionally medical students. I have no agenda for this thread bar a genuine desire to listen, share ideas, and have an open discussion about what is helpful / less so. I worked in NHS MH for 13 odd years.

In case anyone links the other threads that inspired this thread - I have been comissioned to edit a book about people's experiences (service users and carers / family / friends) within MH services and with MH issues. NONE OF THE POSTS HERE WILL BE USED IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM FOR THIS BOOK. You have my ABSOLUTE word on that. Similarly, NONE of the posts here will be used in any of my teaching.

My aim in starting this stems from several PM's and several on-thread comments about how this would be useful/ I hope it can be a helpful, supportive and productive meeting place for thoughts and ideas about what people have found helpful with regards MH care / services / support (statutory and non statutory) and what has been less helpful. Most importantly with regards the less helpful - what can be done differently?

And - beacuse I like books - maybe we can share reading ideas :)

Would it be helpful if I shared parts of my long thread from earlier regarding what I see as needed, without any other details from the thread?

You know what Thunk - I don't have to check when other posters are about to post just to make sure mine don't coincide with theirs.

What you read and don't read is up to you. If you are interested in the excellent post on ACT then read it and let others find it if they want and read it too. You saw it after all? Surely one of the great principles of this thread is that if one person experiences something then others do too?

If you don't agree with my posts up to this point and if you are pretty sure I am saying nothing new, then do not waste your time with them.

If you want to waste your time with failed attempts at paraphrasing my posts that is your business but I don't know why you think people need your help reading and interpreting what I have posted.

There has been some pretty inappropriate crossing of lines in this thread and the other two and I'm surprised more posters can't see it. This is an anonymous chat board, the people you're talking to could be anyone, or even all the same person. There's no way of knowing. Which means in sensitive areas of the board, such as legal and mental health, there should be no blurring of professional and personal boundaries because the potential ramifications are too serious. Whether its a genuine attempt to help or flagrant misinformation in the manner of Judge Flounce, the consequences could be the same.

Posters have agreed that when someone is exhibiting distress the only really effective advice is to seek immediate help in real life. In recent threads though, there were posters who moved beyond just listening and supporting and were clearly attempting to affect a therapeutic role in their interactions with the poster. Whether well meant or not, that's either a serious crossing of the line by a professional or a misplaced sense of superior insight from someone withoutthetraining to back it up.

There are also too many allusions to professional knowledge and connections littered through this run of threads, Ow's upfront disclaimer notwithstanding. Assurances that the right people will see this thread, references to current teaching practices and the calling on named posters as able to advice on certain facets of policy lend an aura of legitimacy that cannot be backed up.

Offering personal experiences and opinions is not a problem, nor is sharing links and resources, but doing it in a thread that has an atmosphere of being something more than just another thread is disturbing. I honestly can't imagine any registered support group, university, hospital or policy and research outfit would be happy for their support or involvement to be even implied. No legitimate body can gather or disseminate information in this format, no professional can offer guidance or support outside a strictly personal capacity, it's far too risky.

Morning everyone. Best wishes to all. Knowledge is power so here are some links:

The best list of support/ campaigning groups I have found is here: www.womenatwish.org.uk/services/usefulorganisationallinks/

For those interested in Recovery ideas in mental health this site is superb: www.recoverydevon.co.uk/ Particularly the brilliant downloadable book of Recovery stories "Beyond the Storms"

For details of what is being done currently to try to change the culture of mental health services : www.centreformentalhealth.org.uk/recovery/supporting_recovery.aspx

I'm personally feeling a bit shocked about the levels of prejudice and discrimination that have been shown at times on these threads but I think I'm going to email MNHQ with my thoughts.

However, one thought: for all the discussion of risk, what do we risk if we deny the reality of someone's experience (and whatever we think as an outsider, their experience is subjectively real) or deny their capacity to think about their own health and care? We risk crushing hope that things can be better, which is an essential part of recovering from anything. And that risk is potentially as damaging and devestating as anything else.

HesterBurnitall,I couldnt agree more.
Not sure where MNHQ legally stands either.
And from MNs post yesterday,they said they were happy to let the thread stand,but didnt actually endorse OW.Cant see how they could,because presumably,they dont know who she is either.

I reported this thread on wednesday.
I dont think that unease with this thread is to do with denying anyone's right to think what they want, have the opinions that they do or to remove hope of recovery etc, it about whether people should claim to have professional skills in an unverifiable way.
It would be possible to have a discussion about MH services, which are clearly not a perfect thing, without anyone claiming expertise that they cannot prove.

Hey hester
I hope that you don't think that I've overstepped the mark in my posting or been harmful to anyone. I had hoped that that was not the case but can appreciate your points.
I think that the thread has now really improved in it's feel. I voiced concerns over some aspects to MN yesterday.
The only thing I would add is that surely anyone who is bound by a professional body will be aware of it's guidelines/strictures and act accordingly

" The only thing I would add is that surely anyone who is bound by a professional body will be aware of it's guidelines/strictures and act accordingly"

I agree with you to an extent but this is an anonymous forum, and no-one posted on this thread has said anything specific enough that you could be sure which specific professional background they are alluding to.

Its a bit of a grey zone isn't it - Someone could say 'I am working in x role, this is my professional registration number, and I want to use mumsnet as a way of delivering therapeutic services. I don't think anyone would do that.
Or they could post without claiming professional skills, but giving opinion and facts.

A few people on this thread are posting in that grey zone of alluding to professional background, and to some extent being treated differently and being accorded credibility because of it, but as hester said we don't know who they are, or even that every single other person on this thread isn't the same person.

It just isn't necessary for people to try to bolster credibility in that way, and I also think that boundaries have been crossed.

Morning all. I had that discussion with MN - about the fact that I'd been open, about them being happy for the thread to stand, and about what I would and wouldn't post.

Hence throughout all my posts have been general signposting, thoughts and kinks, without offering or professing to offer any kind of 'expert advice' as is 'I think you should do X, Y, Z'.

• links and 'as in'

I also offered to out myself to MN, but as they said, as it wasn't intended as an 'expert' thread, and as I had been clear on what the thread aims we'd, I didn't need for them to check.

Yes it is a grey zone, a very thorny one. Which had led to ms to wonder if actually, I need to leave the thread - so that the discussion can step away from the barrage of

I'm pissed off now.

The assumption seems to be that I, as a person with a mental help problem, cannot understand that I have to be cautious about advice on the internet. I'm fully aware that I cannot verify someone's qualifications. Most of the people on here are sufferes anyway. I find it therapeutic to talk about what I have been through.

This is a spiteful attempt to derail a thread.

I also offered to out myself to MN, but as they said, as it wasn't intended as an 'expert' thread, not offered as one, and as I had been clear on what the thread aims were I didn't need for them to check.

I was open from the off as I'd been discussing being a lecturer and the book on the other thread in a different context, so figured that is I wasn't open from the off, someone would link and the. I'd have been accused of being deceptive. Equally, I've been accused of being deceptive precisely BY being open - so I really can't do right for doing wrong.

Yes it is a grey zone, a very thorny one. Which had led to ms to that that actually, I need to leave the thread - so that the discussion can step away from the barrage of posts about me, my responsibilities and roles within a thread, and get back to what people were repeatedly finding useful re links etc.

Thank frothy

Apols for double post - iPhone wrong button while editing!

Thanks for link perry I'll have a look later - it's on my lost of reading for today :)

You could also have namechanged, and then that would have avoided these problems.

Well it's thoroughly derailed and unreadable now.

And the fact that Ow happened to be the one wrote the opening paragraph (on my request), and also declared her interest for openness' sake, has been used by some posters to attempt to represent this as a semi-professional endeavour on her part.

So I'd suggest we save the links, wait for people to calm down or stick their heads in a bucket of water or whatever, and then start a thread like this again. But maybe started by someone without professional qualifications, to prevent anyone making that an issue. Although obviously professionals would be extremely valuable on the thread for their knowledge of resources and links, as Ow has shown.

But I'm not going to do this myself, I'm afraid. I don't have the energy to keep going in the face of really determined derailers.

I could fireice but as I'd been asked by several posters, as Nilgiri and others have said on here, then I guess I'd have been outer pretty quickly.

Thanks again Nilgiri - it was never set up as any semi-professional endeavour as clearly stated. I hope a future thread can go well without the derailing to provide the balance of positivity and the sharing of links etc that this thread had achieved. All best :)

And no, fireice, name-changing wouldn't have solved the problems. Given the previous context, that really would have looked like there was something dodgy going on had Ow's claimed professional connections come out at any point - which things tend to as threads get long and chatty.

(Sorry Ow, just trying to make sure no one loses sleep worrying that I take your "claims" at face value.)

I'm sure that if Ow had namechanged she would also have been able to not mention lecturing or a book.

Failed attempts at paraphrasing? You are kidding, right? This is a total farce. Your whole premise on this thread was that you were concerned about the effects on vulnerable ill posters and lurkers. Yet you are perfectly happy to be vitriolic, dismissive, attacking and belligerent with people who have shared the fact that they have current mental health concerns? Do you honestly think that when I challenge inconsistency and hypocrisy it is a "failed paraphrase" of your posts? I suppose it is my warped, deluded interpretation of your words, being "mental" and all. As the thread continues, you undermine your argument more and more. It is very obvious to me that there has been more damage done by your posts than by anyone discussing their experiences. The outright hostility isn't exactly the "moral support" that MNHQ suggested would be wise.

Hester, I actually do think that blurring of professional boundaries can be an issue. On the other thread, my posts were all about realising that engaging with someone who seemed very unwell was unwise, though my concerns about professional involvement were somewhat different. I felt it was very unwise to have professionals "defending their territory" by flaming a poster who seemed in the grip of a serious illness for "demonising" mental health workers.

However, this thread could just have been a discussion about experiences - it certainly started off that way. I didn't feel there was any suggestion it would be a "campaign" or that it would extend beyond the thread other than being somewhere people could discuss these issues.

There is an infantilisation of people with mental health happening here: posters should take extra special care because everyone is so vulnerable, after all, the crazies probably take every word on face value (and that is down to the words and who posts them rather than the effects of a real life illness). Mental health service users themselves should remember when they post that they have a "duty" to consider how their words will impact on others more ill than themselves (though how we are supposed to judge this and anticipate how our experiences would affect someone nameless, faceless lurker is beyond me!). Dissatisfaction with services is almost certainly always a symptom of illness. The consequences of suggesting that services might not be all they could be will be that real life people delay and avoid help, not because they are ill but because they have read that some people's experiences aren't great.

You will find information about experiences with mental health services that are not positive on ANY mental health forum. A person with mental health concerns who has contact with others will hear positive and negative stories about mental health facilities. People with mental health concerns - shock! horror! - are allowed to speak to people in real life who may offer misguided advice too. In fact, I'd doubt there's anyone who has had mental health concerns who hasn't had that well-intentioned "oh when I'm feeling sad I take a hot bath" sort of advice from friends, carers and even GPs. It won't be searchable on the internet, but the difference is that when people look for information on the internet, they will find positive and negative accounts side by side and they will choose to read either, both or neither. Getting rid of this thread or bombarding a thread with messages about its inappropriacy to kill it, attacking people who have self-identified as having mental health issues for "irresponsibly" discussing their lives and calling it "hubris" (?!) will not change what happens in the real world in any serious or significant way.

" Dissatisfaction with services is almost certainly always a symptom of illness."

Are you being serious there?

If the thread is deleted to pander to de-railers, and in spite of repeated pleading by the many who have found it incredibly useful, then I agree with others that the links should be saved onto another thread. Just title it useful links for mental health, post the links, no comments to offend Mathanxiety.

Whoever takes the decision to delete the thread could start the new thread with all the links. The tedious work of saving and copying all the links would bring home to the deleter just how incredibly useful the thread is.

If I had time, I would be saving all the links myself. I don't have time. Please can someone do it. It probably does need to be MNHQ - otherwise whoever does it will be shot down.

No, I am saying that's what some posters have been suggesting. It was referred to as a "symptom" earlier in the thread.

Extremely good post thunks.