Saturday, April 17, 2010

Late In Day Rethink UK Challenged No Patient Choice In Mental Health


By UserWatch Correspondents


But Why oh why so late in the day Rethink with your "reforming" Rethoughts ?

Lets Explain :

In Jan 2009 The Labour Government , Secretary of State produced a document that barred Patient Choices in Mental Health - See our article with document HERE

In February 2010 Rethink after asking around for mental health patient issues to put to the Gov't NHS Constitution consultations, we finally see Rethink DID put the lack of the (legally empowered) Mental Health Patient Choice Agenda to the Gov't. Finally Rethink showed concern in the same year as the election . (see their FEB 4th 2010 document)

Rethink have sat at DOH advisory meetings on mental health and have been inside these networks for years alongside MIND and Sainsbury's Centre For Mental Health and could have liberated MH patients by making Mental Health Patient Choice the central reforming axis back in 2002 when the Charity combine all got involved building NIMHE which was architected by the big wheel SCMH .

Sainsbury's Registrant info

MIND has been partly been busy becoming a CBT provisioner and stoking up its own concerns about the "nasty" private therapists market, because those "nasts" do not wish to fall under the Gov't prefered Health Professions Council but do have perfectly adaptable ethics and complaints systems that suit . Contractuality at the point of agreed supply can also sort out the patient safety issues regarding patient safety but the arguments regarding therapy supply like other things are neatly diverted to favour State designed supply - and those who agree with it .

Frankly private therapy services mixed with eclectic approaches could have been directly purchased or accessed to, years ago via GP's, as in fact happened in Dorset under PCT purchasing arrangements in the late 1990's . But New Labour screwed up those arrangements and re-invented the power of the State and the MH Charities sniffed the air .. Didn't you just all . Charities are provisoners and part of the market now .. That needs serious scrutiny . The cross woven conflicts of interests with Charities on DOH related advisory groups are just too much and need boundarising quite seriously ..Transparency into all of this matters .

The TIME FOR A CHANGE charity-combine anti-stigma project with oodles of cash swilling about(£20 Million) about, is another partial red herring . A big show . The real stigma New Labour and the mental health Charities have supported by default with diversionary flag waving, and inside their own narrowed anti stigma vision is Mental Health Patient Choice by de-prioritising it ...

The show goes on .. The networkers know it, and the money swills ..The Ducks and swimmers are out in the show ..

If indeed Patient Choice was ever fully noticed by most pained MH Users who think State or its close agents is all, and whose lives are dominated by that . There's no CHOICE .. No culture that sees and upholds Mental Health Patient Freedom and actually drives it . The so called USER MOVEMENT is just a narrow often middle class collective of careerists posing as "representatives" .. They represent their own needs but not everyone else's . Patient Choice can free everyone . They cannot .

When is the MH Patient going to be free of State dominion and by default its circular envisioned supporters ? Maybe get UserWatch CBT to stop this self defeating co-reinforcing strands of behaviour ?.... Nahhh just start seeing what you already know is real .. You are , your needs are, and the State isn't ..

When is the Patient going to be free of the politically manipulative corrals and bullshit bureaucratic economy that has grown up on the back of the avoidance of Mental Health Patient Choice ? NIMHE cost £ 100 Million 2004 - 8 and beyond its name change to the National Mental Health Development Unit what is it set to waste now ?

The UK User Trance-dance continues . The NHS loves it . People who own corrals are secured . Hope though is inside freeing choice not being captured by the State or its dominion Charities who need to possess the branded patient for their own economic and social needs.


No comments: