.
A guidance document circulated by the Dept Of Health which came into force on April 1st 2009 militates against the mechanism of Patient Choice in mental health services .
Patient Choice is, for the rest of the population, a reality and it enables people to have a choice of consultant and hospital.
Whilst it is true that legally sectionable people may have no right to choose a venue of treatment because of their state of mind, the Secretary Of State guidance issued by Katharine Peters member of the Senior Civil Service, Department of Health, on January 2009 does not make distinctions that validate a whole other sections of mental health Users (who are sane though damaged people) who might benefit from Patient Choice and the right to be served elsewhere other than their local Trust supply sides .
The guidance we believe is drafted poorly in that respect. and puts the Govt on a disability discrimination course . It also stigmatises MH Users too into second class citizenhood but then what is new with this UK Govt that limits options - creates "mainstreamed" services that cannot fit many, along with poor supports for many in mental health while shining it all up through their performance glossed Trusts ?
Meanwhile the misery in the community of silienced choiceless Users goes on . Where are the MH Charities ? Busy feeding off the work-driven CBT anti stigma drives they arranged at the table of Gov't, and prospering off the lottery until they can find a new gimmick to put forward as the next "modernisation" wave ..
Reforming mental health meant introducing Patient Choice and equality of opportunity to drive services into better quality by state enabled consumer choice power .
See also FULL DOCUMENT HERE
Patient Choice is, for the rest of the population, a reality and it enables people to have a choice of consultant and hospital.
Whilst it is true that legally sectionable people may have no right to choose a venue of treatment because of their state of mind, the Secretary Of State guidance issued by Katharine Peters member of the Senior Civil Service, Department of Health, on January 2009 does not make distinctions that validate a whole other sections of mental health Users (who are sane though damaged people) who might benefit from Patient Choice and the right to be served elsewhere other than their local Trust supply sides .
The guidance we believe is drafted poorly in that respect. and puts the Govt on a disability discrimination course . It also stigmatises MH Users too into second class citizenhood but then what is new with this UK Govt that limits options - creates "mainstreamed" services that cannot fit many, along with poor supports for many in mental health while shining it all up through their performance glossed Trusts ?
Meanwhile the misery in the community of silienced choiceless Users goes on . Where are the MH Charities ? Busy feeding off the work-driven CBT anti stigma drives they arranged at the table of Gov't, and prospering off the lottery until they can find a new gimmick to put forward as the next "modernisation" wave ..
Reforming mental health meant introducing Patient Choice and equality of opportunity to drive services into better quality by state enabled consumer choice power .
From the Guidance :
Page 2 :
Services to which the duty does not apply
3.—(1) Direction 2 does not apply in relation to—
(a) accident and emergency services;
(b) cancer services or services provided at rapid access chest pain clinics which are subject to
the 2 week maximum waiting time(a);
(c) maternity services;
(d) mental health services;
Services to which the duty does not apply
3.—(1) Direction 2 does not apply in relation to—
(a) accident and emergency services;
(b) cancer services or services provided at rapid access chest pain clinics which are subject to
the 2 week maximum waiting time(a);
(c) maternity services;
(d) mental health services;
See also FULL DOCUMENT HERE 
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment