Editorial
| Published date | 01 October 2006 |
| Date | 01 October 2006 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/17556228200600009 |
| Pages | 3-3 |
| Author | Ian Baguley,Di Bailey,Peter Lindley,Peter Ryan |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care |
3
The Journal of Mental Health Workforce Development Volume 1 Issue 2 October 2006 © Pavilion Journals (Brighton) Ltd
Editorial
This edition of The Journal of Mental Health Workforce
Development is devoted to psychological therapies, with a
particular focus on workforce implications. Over the past
six months it has become increasingly obvious that the
government’sdrive to increase access to psychological
therapies (IAPT) is now acquiring some substance
through the funding of a national programme of work to
inform the comprehensive spending review in 2007.
Treatment centre pilot sites have been set up in
Newham and Doncaster and the initial thrust will be to
help people who are currently receiving incapacity
benefit back into employment. The two sites will operate
in verydifferent ways; Newham is developing a
treatment centre that will be staffed by trained cognitive
behaviour therapists whilst Doncaster will take a more
‘stepped care’ approach to staff skills and competencies.
In their article in this edition, Turpin and colleagues
describe the background to this decision and provide the
context within which the IAPT programme is operating.
However,there remain concerns about the initial
target client group – those of working age. Clearly older
people, those in the criminal justice system, younger
people and children have the same rights to good quality
psychological therapy as those of working age. It is clear
from her paper that Moira Fraser and colleagues at the
Mental Health Foundation will be keeping a close eye on
this programme and will want to see evidence of a move
to improve access to all sections of society.
In order to effectively increase access to psychological
therapy a number of issues need to be addressed. First,
there is the issue of regulation for the large number of
people who already work in mental health, mainly
counsellors and psychotherapists, who do not come
under the scrutiny of any professional body and remain
unregulated. There are also new workers being
introduced to the mental health workforce for whom
governance arrangements need to be put in place. In her
paper, Ros Mead explains how regulation and governance
issues are being addressed for these currently unregulated
groups by the Department of Health, and what
implications there may be for closer control of the
currently regulated professional groups in mental health.
Second, we need to be exercised by a number of issues
that concern education and training as well as the
optimal organisation of brief therapy services. All those
who work in mental health need to be engaged in the
process to inform the service models that will deliver
psychological therapy.There is a healthy debate to be had
about the best model of service needed, should we be
developing large cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT)
centres staffed by fully trained cognitive behaviour
therapists or should we be developing a stepped care
approach that utilises a range of supported self-help
interventions in addition to fully trained therapists?
Kevin Gournay’sarticle in this edition looks with a
constructively critical eye both at the stepped care option
for service delivery, as well as looking carefully at the
resource implications of this new initiative.
We also need to be mindful of those service users
whose distress and experience is not alleviated or
improved by exposure to CBT.Bill Davidson‘s article
gives an honest and critical account from a user
perspective of the shortfalls of current services and the
likely implications of this for the new psychological
therapies initiative.
We should view the current activities as a beginning,
avital part in the process but still a beginning. The
challenge just around the corner will be one of
implementation; once the arguments regarding the best
or most effective service model have been resolved the
stormy waters of implementation will need to be
navigated and that will not be an easy task. In his article
in this edition, Bill Davidson is right to point out that
those with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo
will need persuading of the need for change.
Those of us who are ex-users of mental health services,
those who are current users of services, and those of us
who are potential future service users (and that should
cover everyone) deserve to have services driven by their
needs and the needs of their families and carers.
Ian Baguley, Di Bailey, Peter Lindley and Peter Ryan
Editors, The Journal of Mental Health Workforce Development
To continue reading
Request your trial