I watched yesterday's events in the House of
Lords with great interest. And was of course delighted when Peers
backed - by a margin of 4 votes - an amendment to place an explicit
dury on the Secretary of State to promote parity of esteem
between mental and physical health services. I'd like to
thank all those Peers who spoke so eloquently about the need to
recognise the importance of mental health, and those who voted in
favour of the amendment.
I recently wrote to the American Psychiatric Association, asking
for information about mental health "parity" in the United States.
They sent me a memorandum prepared
for a meeting at the White House in 2009 and a presentation on the
2008 Mental Health Parity law. Although the situation here is very
different to that in the US, I thought you may like to see the
documents and reflect on what American psychiatrists have been
fighting for.
It has been an extremely busy week. On Tuesday I joined
clinicians and academics at the Warneford Hospital, where Professor
John Geddes chaired a meeting on ‘Leadership’. Dr Phil Davison gave
an entertaining and informative account of the role, purpose and
function of the College, and I presented a few thoughts on
leadership. Then followed a very informed discussion and debate on
key issues, ranging from - inevitably - the Health and Social Care
Bill, but more particularly the future of academic psychiatry and
how there could be a clearer, more certain pathway for trainees and
young consultants to have an academic career. There was also
discussion about where future postgraduate education would be
placed.
On my way out of the grounds, it was great to
see the new build emerging for the Tier 4 adolescent inpatient
CAMHS unit. Phil Davison is always one to keep you busy, and
therefore I was able to meet him and colleagues at the railway
station to discuss further ideas about the College’s sustainability
plan, and in particular how we might be able to find and fund a
Clinical Fellow to take this work forward within the College.
I was also in Parliament this week to be part
of the Joint APPG (All Party Parliamentary Group) on reform of care
and support, where the joint care APPGs, although having different
focuses, had reached a consensus on top priorities. It got me
thinking about the way we work across Faculties and Divisions,
because although the groups were different they have things in
common. So what
are the APPGs? Well there is one on Aging and older people;
Complex needs and dual diagnosis; Carers; Dementia; Disability
group; Housing and care for older people; Learning disability; ME;
Multiple sclerosis; Parkinsons; and Social care. It struck me that
across the Faculties we could be doing more work on key areas that
we have in common, in particular around the dilemma on housing and
how such groups could have more of their medical care in their home
rather than being hospitalised.
Tuesday evening saw me at a dinner at the
Royal College of Anaesthetists. As well as being a good dinner, we
heard from the QC, who has been leading the West Staffordshire
investigation and inquiry, that the report is due soon. But it was
indeed a very sobering and thoughtful after dinner speech.
Yesterday, I went to a medicine sector
roundtable on social mobility. Alan Milburn was appointed the
independent reviewer on social mobility and child poverty, and he
will be reporting in the spring on what progress government,
employers and professional bodies have made in improving access to
professional careers, since the publication the 2009 report
Unleashing Aspiration by the
Panel on Fair Access to the Professions. This was a good
opportunity to tell him about the work that many of you are
doing as part of the recruitment drive in secondary schools, where
we are trying to reach out to those young people who may never have
considered a career in medicine, and certainly not in
psychiatry.
Sue
Subscribe to this post's comments using RSS