ask to speak at a meeting of your local council, the Council will tell you which meeting is covering the issues; you get 3mins, or you do here, tell them your truth … it’s, at the very least, officially recorded and you’ll be surprised about how many others will share your concerns.

I have been invited to this and other issues, alongside those directly impacted, at the York City Council, Health and Well-being Board on the 22.11.23.

What are you doing?

creating the conditions that cause harm is, in the law of tort, a highly litigious area; and where a contract for services directly interferes with (i) the rights of the child to go to Court and/or (ii) undermines the satisfaction of social policy and (iii) is driven by service level contractual obligations outside the scope of the responsible commissioner ratherthan the Care Plan for the child ~ all contracting is null and void.

the same applies for adults although the issues of liabilities falling from the duty of care are more ambiguously constructed.

This is about the nuanced nature of how trauma manifests bodily and impacts executive brain function, compounding sometimes exaggerating an underlying, equally nuanced and overlapped condition, like anxiety and depression, adhd/autism/disassociative conditions, like bpd/eupd. Or, as can be the case non-of-the above.

The lack of oversight requires, say, within an encapsulatory diagnostic protocol, with treatment options facilitating trauma recovery as a first resort, lessening the reduction and emasculatory lumping together of ‘everything’ as .

It’s almost twenty years since the, then, Government freed up capital spend for the development of the low-medium secure psychiatric estate ~ and while the numbers of patient deaths within this patient group is staggering high the diagnostic protocol for detention, it would seem, has deteriorated.

Very few people know that bpd as a diagnostic category first emerged in the early 1990’s. Championed, in the US, by psychotherapists challenging the diagnosis of schizophrenia amongst a largely ie 3:1 female patient group displaying largely behavioural management problems.

The key insight lay from the study of the transference and countertransference between doctor and patient ~ patients who had been victims of sexual violence, often in childhood became the basis for an examination of the dynamics making bpd a separated category of mental disorder and includes an awareness of systemic invalidation emasculated by a diagnosis of schizophrenia.
The treatment of bpd was best achieved through cooperation and to day-hospital care ratherthan full in-patient detention.

Work I was involved in decades ago used, under the watch of the MHAC, guardianship orders, and when ASW’s were permitted, sought out alternatives to detention in hospital, in one instance this included adult respite with a adult foster family.

The treatment and control of psychosis amongst women patients has been a sore point for decades. It’s highly specialised work ~ the diagnostic splitting from schizophrenia heralded the start of trauma-informed approaches ~ being trauma informed means helping the patient build up their tolerances through a whole range of grounding and stabilisation techniques, and crucially being positively involved with their bodies through exercise or outdoor activities. Not the removal of their liberties through control and confinement ~ my memory of the MHA Code of Guidance suggests that such interventions are to be treated as systemic in all and every instance.

Again, from memory the words, ‘any restrictions in movement exceeding 72hrs in a 28 day period are to be treated as a fundamental breach of liberties and require the approval of the Secretary of State’ are etched on.

Nobody’s saying that the work is easy ~ I know it isn’t. But really wtf is going on?

I’m not sure this judgement holds up Ruth. My reading of the law says, ‘any restrictions in movement that cumulatively exceed 72hrs in a 28day period’ is a fundamental breach of liberty and most be signed off by the Secretary of State. It’s etched in my mind as I was the IRO pressing the issues. Yvette Cooper MP should remember the details because the local Unison branch baulked against the impact on staff.