Criticising psychiatry is not ‘antipsychiatry’

McLaren, Niall

doi:10.1177/0004867419835944

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, such activism has been met with pockets of disapproval, as ED advocacy to improve alternative service access was misunderstood as being obtrusive. Innovative ways of working including proactively seeking alternative care options, other than having to attend ED to have mental health concerns addressed, continue to attract opposition (McLaren 2019;Young & Calloway, 2021). Additionally moving forward with trauma informed care, reducing the reliance on diagnostics and restrictive practices within the ED, and committing to recovery orientated care options were regarded as challenging traditional methods (Allison et al 2019;Horowitz & Wilcock, 2022;Munkholm et al 2019;Whitely et al 2020).…”

Section: Challenging the Status Quo And Advocating For Better Patient...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effecting change and improving practice in a regional Emergency Department: A Mental Health Nurse Practitioner's perspective

O’Sullivan

2022

Int J Mental Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Providing appropriate, timely intervention and care to people who present with mental health issues to an Emergency Department presents unique ongoing challenges, often affecting patient experiences and outcomes. To address such concerns, a Mental Health Liaison Nurse role, led by a Mental Health Nurse Practitioner, was introduced to a regional Emergency Department. This role provided integrated emergency‐based mental health clinical practice, with positive findings reported in a recently published multi‐site translational research project. With sound quantitative and qualitative evidence detailing the benefits of this role, the experiential perspective from a clinician working in this frontline space further confirms the importance of having access to such a position in leading cultural and systemic change. This discussion article identifies key processes that align current research with the clinical perspective. Such processes recognize the challenges of implementing a new role and moving forward from these to embed consistent clinical practices. The need to build sound internal and external stakeholder partnerships, effect change implementation, and assign recommendations to ensure sustainability of improved practice and processes are highlighted in this paper. This article is, therefore, designed to assist other advanced practice nurses, who may be embarking on a similar journey and want to influence organizational policy and practice.

show abstract

Section: Challenging the Status Quo And Advocating For Better Patient...mentioning

confidence: 99%

Effecting change and improving practice in a regional Emergency Department: A Mental Health Nurse Practitioner's perspective

O’Sullivan

2022

Int J Mental Health Nurs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Equally, there was a prior discourse defending psychiatric practices within which critics tended to be categorised as 'anti-psychiatry'. The UN reports generated familiar defences and antagonistic discourse with commentators classifying the reports and the SR as 'anti-psychiatric' (Dharmawardene & Menkes, 2018;McLaren, 2019aMcLaren, , 2019bMenkes & Dharmawardene, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conflict and antagonism within global psychiatry: A discourse analysis of organisational responses to the UN reports on rights‐based approaches in mental health

Oute,

McPherson

2023

Sociology Health & Illness

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Between 2017 and 2020, the UN Special Rapporteur (SR) Dainius Puras published three reports that called for significant changes to organisation, funding and service provision in mental health care in ways that emphasise inclusive, rights‐oriented, democratic and sustainable community health services. This article aims to examine formal organisational responses to the UN mental health reports and consider the underlying arguments that either support or delegitimise the SR stance on the need for a paradigmatic shift towards a human rights‐based approach to mental health. By combining several different search strategies to identify organisational responses across the web, a total of 13 organisational responses were included in the analysis. Given the political nature of the responses, concepts from discourse theory were used to analyse the responses. The analysis showed how the responses articulated two binary positions and contesting articulations of good mental health care, which formed a backdrop for rejecting the SR reports in defence of psychiatry. The discussion elucidates how the responses tend to resemble previous ways in which critique has been dealt with mainly by ‘biological psychiatry’, but that the counter‐critical nature of the medical and psychiatric organisational responses remains in contrast to the broader reception within the UN community.

show abstract

“…Our critique (Dharmawardene and Menkes, 2019) of the UN Special Rapporteur’s Report on mental health (UN Human Rights Council, 2017) has been challenged by two further articles in the ANZJP (Cosgrove and Jureidini, 2019; McLaren, 2019). Both attempt to defend the Report, but the latter’s fundamental anti-psychiatry bias remains both unmissable and dangerous.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…McLaren (2019), on the contrary, makes the astonishing assertion that the biomedical model of mental illness ‘ doesn’t exist ’; he perceives a monolithic, self-absorbed psychiatric profession that regards all mental disorders as biological. His extreme views, typical of anti-psychiatry, are unsurprisingly promulgated by the Church of Scientology (www.youtube.com/watch?v=nzdu3WQyIZg).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti-psychiatry in 2019, and why it matters

Menkes

Dharmawardene

2019

Aust N Z J Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

patient asleep. This is an area that would benefit from further research. Finally, the guidelines give some prominence to ECT with a 0.5-millisecond PW. The evidence base is probably too weak for it to have been included in Table 1 alongside the more robust options of 1-millisecond PW ECT and RUL UB ECT, but at least the guidelines do acknowledge the lower level of evidence for 0.5-millisecond ECT. However, I would take issue with their assertion that 0.5-millisecond ECT is 'at the lower end of the brief pulse range'. The evidence that exists about 0.5-millisecond PW ECT suggests it is fact closer to 0.3 milliseconds than 1 millisecond in terms of efficacy and adverse effects. In fact, Sienaert et al. (2018) argue persuasively that 0.5-millisecond PW ECT should be considered a wider form of UB ECT rather than a narrower form of brief pulse ECT. However, there is also a good argument for simply naming the actual pulse width in milliseconds and abandoning the terms 'ultrabrief' and 'brief pulse' altogether.

show abstract

Criticising psychiatry is not ‘antipsychiatry’

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Effecting change and improving practice in a regional Emergency Department: A Mental Health Nurse Practitioner's perspective

Effecting change and improving practice in a regional Emergency Department: A Mental Health Nurse Practitioner's perspective

Conflict and antagonism within global psychiatry: A discourse analysis of organisational responses to the UN reports on rights‐based approaches in mental health

Anti-psychiatry in 2019, and why it matters

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About