Search

Summary: Translocation of the threatened species Singelton Mint Bush (Prostanthera cineolifera R.T.Baker & H.G.Sm.) was carried out for a highway project on the New South Wales North Coast to mitigate development impact on this species. The translocation aimed to augment an existing population with propagated plants to compensate for cleared plants and conduct field research to better understand the effects of soil properties, horticultural practices and a wildfire on translocation results. A novel soil seedbank and fire method applied ex‐situ was used to propagate plants for introduction. After an initial attempt at site‐wide introduction resulted in widespread mortality of seedlings from a wilt disease, three plot‐based experiments were carried out to examine how disease incidence was related to spatial variation in soil properties and horticultural practices. The experiments showed that relatively subtle changes in the clay and sand content of soil strongly affected susceptibility of Singelton Mint Bush seedlings to wilt disease; 12 month old seedlings performed much better than 6 month old seedlings; plants propagated from seed performed better than cuttings, and most of the recipient site represented unsuitable habitat for Singelton Mint Bush. Sufficient Singelton Mint Bush seedlings were established after 3 years, but after a bushfire, the translocated cohort recruited poorly from seed, so that after 6 years, <10% of the total Singelton Mint Bush population in the recipient site was of translocated origin and >90% of in‐situ (pre‐translocation) origin. Lessons learnt from the translocation project were that: (i) microhabitat is as important as macrohabitat in selecting a translocation recipient site; (ii) short‐term survival may not be a reliable indicator of a self‐sustaining population; (iii) translocation incorporating designed experiments can greatly improve understanding of how certain factors influence species performance and (iv) horticultural practices can be as important as ecology in determining the translocation outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the UK in 2007 a national experiment was initiated with the aim of tackling “Britain’s biggest social problem”: depression. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) was devised as the solution. A universal free-to-access talking therapies program would make available evidence-based treatment to all patients with depression and anxiety disorders. NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence), the body that decides on what is cost-effective, said cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT), not medication, should be its first line offer. The starting gun was fired. The promise from IAPT was 3-fold: to scale up access to CBT rapidly; to achieve recovery targets that would reduce the prevalence of depression and anxiety disorders over time; and – most ambitious of all – to ensure the Treasury would see a return on its investment by reducing the economic burden from depression. People who were on invalidity benefits due to depression would be supported back into employment. It was a New Deal for depression, as well as for CBT. But did it work? A decade and a half on with IAPT, are we in any position to give an answer? It is attempted to draw lessons about “what worked”, and what didn’t, to ask ourselves a question: are we – those of us in the applied psychoanalytic community – willing to garner what can be learned from IAPT to advocate a New Deal for evidence-based psychoanalysis? Faced with challenges from unemployment and widening inequalities, against a backdrop where global economic recovery must heed the existential threats from climate change and warfare, to say nothing of the scale of loss and grief for those already impacted by bereavement due to the pandemic, the need for such deal could not be more urgent [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the UK in 2007 a national experiment was initiated with the aim of tackling "Britain's Biggest Social Problem"—Depression. Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) was devised as the solution. A universal free‐to‐access talking therapies program would make available evidence‐based treatment to all adults with depression. NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence), the body that decides on what is cost‐effective, said CBT, not antidepressants, should be its first line offer. The starting gun was fired. The promise from IAPT was 3‐fold: to scale up access to CBT rapidly; to achieve recovery targets that would reduce the prevalence of depression over time; and—most ambitious of all—to ensure the Treasury would see a return on its investment by reducing the economic burden from depression. People who were on invalidity benefits due to depression would be supported back into employment. It was a New Deal for depression. As well as for CBT. But did it work? A decade and a half on with IAPT, are we in any position to give an answer? This paper will seek to draw lessons about "What Worked", and what didn't, to ask ourselves a question: are we—those of us in the applied psychoanalytic community—willing to garner what can be learned from IAPT to advocate a new deal for evidence‐based psychoanalysis? Faced with challenges from unemployment and widening inequalities, against a backdrop where global economic recovery must heed the existential threats from climate change and ongoing warfare, to say nothing of the scale of loss and grief for those already impacted by bereavement due to the pandemic, the need for some such deal could not be more urgent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper offers a preview of a forthcoming article on the world's first, universal free‐to‐access, evidence‐based talking therapies programme to treat depression: Improving Access to Psychological Therapies. It was pioneered not in the USA, but the UK, in 2007. At one time it could have been led by psychoanalysts, but it wasn't. It was a New Deal, in fact, for CBT. But did this New Deal in 2007 also offer psychoanalysis an opportunity to renew its vitality as a discipline, after decades of being eroded by our long‐term retreat into private practice? Illustrated in the film From Here to Eternity, through characters played by Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift and Frank Sinatra, this Preview shows how applied psychoanalysis can once again aspire to become a universal, genuinely popular, relevant professional discipline. How would we engage ethically with psychiatric casualties of war, for example, within an evidence‐based practice framework today? A novel, brief psychoanalytic treatment for depression, Dynamic Interpersonal Therapy, was developed for use in the UK's Improving Access to Psychological Therapies (IAPT) programme. It is recommended by NICE (National Institute for Health and Care Excellence) as cost‐effective for treating depression. By engaging with evidence‐based practice in this way—as Street Level Bureaucrats—we can reclaim our position at the centre of contemporary publicly funded mental health services. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The well‐being of the psychological workforce is an area of concern. However, it has been sparsely studied in a holistic manner encompassing workplace well‐being as well as burnout. This study reports a survey of 1,678 psychological practitioners accessed through professional networks. The short Warwick Edinburgh Mental Well‐being Scale (SWEMWBS) and the Psychological Practitioner Workplace Well‐being Measure (PPWWM) were administered with a demographic questionnaire. The mean for the SWEMWBS was below that of a national population survey. The intercorrelation of these tests was.61. Subgroup analyses showed significant differences: assistant psychologists, counsellors and psychological well‐being practitioners demonstrated better than average workplace well‐being. But for general well‐being (SWEMWBS), trainee clinical psychologists and assistant psychologists showed lower than average well‐being, whereas psychological well‐being practitioners were higher than average. Other factors associated with well‐being were contract type—both measures (higher workplace well‐being in those with temporary contracts and the self‐employed); employment sector—for PPWWM only (private organisation/independent workers and third sector/charitable organisation workers scored above the PPWWM mean); ethnicity—for both measures (Asian groups except Chinese had higher well‐being than average for the PPWWM and SWEMWBS) and disability was strongly associated with lower well‐being on both measures. Harassment, feeling depressed or a failure and wanting to leave the National Health Service (NHS) were associated with lower well‐being. Greater age, pay and years of service were negatively correlated with well‐being. A five‐factor structure was obtained with this sample. The results confirmed psychological practitioners as an at‐risk group and identified a number of factors associated with workplace well‐being. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dalal says that spending public money sensibly like this "is completely reasonable" (p. 138), but his jumping off point is not the disaster of the tsunami of CBT itself (IAPT) but the earthquake that produced it, Professor Lord Richard Layard's influence under the New Labour government in promoting his agenda for happiness (Layard, [9]). For Dalal, if I understand his key objections, the reason therapy cannot be tested in the same way as for anti-depressants, for which he thinks an RCT "works fine" (p. 157), is you cannot meet the conditions of blinding participants (patients, therapists and those analysing the results) as to which is the real treatment, and which is the placebo. Yet, though they write authoritatively about IAPT's flaws and with little to nothing positive to say about IAPT's achievements, and whilst much of this negative criticism I agree with, only a couple of authors, as far as I can tell, have more than a passing involvement in IAPT directly. More pointedly, Rose tells us, it was in the context of the financial crisis of 2008 and the austerity policies which followed on, that IAPT practitioners were operating, delivering: therapy conceived along the lines of a course of pharmaceutical treatment, with its effects being "dose dependent" - that is to say, the benefits depend on the number of "doses", or "treatment episodes", up to the completion of the prescribed course. [Extracted from the article]

Melanie Klein's seminal concept of projective identification provides an important theoretical mechanism for working through the Oedipus complex. Klein saw it as the key to achieving emotional maturity. As well as the choice of object, which decides our sexual identity, Klein sees a second choice to be made as subject, which shapes our gender. The question is not only 'what does a woman (or man) want?', as Freud and Jones argued, but 'who (and how) does a woman (or man) become?', as Simone de Beauvoir memorably asked. How is our gender acquired for us and by us? Queer theory asks us to refuse gender normativity. That is one response. But unless we arrive at our own answer to gender, says Klein, the capacities both to love and to be loved will remain elusive. Klein invites us to leave Oedipus behind in Ancient Thebes and move the stage to Paris in 1920, the setting for a novel by Julien Green, If I Were You. Our Modern hero is a young man, Fabian Especel. This article rediscovers Fabian and adds to Klein's theory of internal objects the role of queer objects as Weberian 'abject types', to update the Oedipus complex today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

JOURNEY TO THE EAST: THE JESUIT MISSION TO CHINA, 1579-1724. By Liam Matthew Brockey. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University, 2008. Pp. xii + 512. $35; $19.95. This work [...]

Is our foundational story of sexual identity still relevant and valid for today, or is it wrong? Oedipus has been used in the past as a cautionary tale for the consequences of transgressive sexuality, as well as an exemplar of hetero-normative development. Perhaps most influentially he has been used recently to illustrate a mechanism that underpins the concept of a pathological organization of personality, a perverse turning of a blind eye to the truth. But is this reading mistaken? In this article I return to the crossroads with Oedipus to try to give him back – for the first time – his sexual identity. By offering a re-reading of the myth in light of how we understand the impact of internalized stigma on the formation of sexual identity today I hope to show that our psychoanalytic imagination can use the Oedipus myth to encompass a range of different developmental possibilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: To make informed choices, patients need information about negative as well as positive effects of treatments. There is little information about negative effects of psychological interventions.Aims: To determine the prevalence of and risk factors for perceived negative effects of psychological treatment for common mental disorders.Method: Cross-sectional survey of people receiving psychological treatment from 184 services in England and Wales. Respondents were asked whether they had experienced lasting bad effects from the treatment they received.Results: Of 14 587 respondents, 763 (5.2%) reported experiencing lasting bad effects. People aged over 65 were less likely to report such effects and sexual and ethnic minorities were more likely to report them. People who were unsure what type of therapy they received were more likely to report negative effects (odds ratio (OR) = 1.51, 95% CI 1.22-1.87), and those that stated that they were given enough information about therapy before it started were less likely to report them (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.54-0.79).Conclusions: One in 20 people responding to this survey reported lasting bad effects from psychological treatment. Clinicians should discuss the potential for both the positive and negative effects of therapy before it starts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Providers of psychological therapies are encouraged to offer patients choice about their treatment, but there is very little information about what preferences people have or the impact that meeting these has on treatment outcomes. Method: Cross-sectional survey of people receiving psychological treatment from 184 NHS services in England and Wales. 14,587 respondents were asked about treatment preferences and the extent to which these were met by their service. They were also asked to rate the extent to which therapy helped them cope with their difficulties. Results: Most patients (12,549-86.0 %, 95% CI: 85.5-86.6) expressed a preference for at least one aspect of their treatment. Of these, 4,600 (36.7 %, 95% CI: 35.8-37.5) had at least one preference that was not met. While most patients reported that their preference for appointment times, venue and type of treatment were met, only 1,769 (40.5 %) of the 4,253 that had a preference for gender had it met. People who expressed a preference that was not met reported poorer outcomes than those with a preference that was met (Odds Ratios: appointment times = 0.29, venue = 0.32, treatment type = 0.16, therapist gender = 0.32, language in which treatment was delivered = 0.40). Conclusions: Most patients who took part in this survey had preferences about their treatment. People who reported preferences that were not met were less likely to state that treatment had helped them with their problems. Routinely assessing and meeting patient preferences may improve the outcomes of psychological treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses various reports published within the issue, including one on homophobia by Allen, one on the changing socio-political and mental health landscape of sexuality by King and one by Barden on the contemporary concepts of gender and sexual identity.

Two years ago, we published within this journal a scoping article (Turpin et al, 2006) concerning the urgent need to review and enhance the workforce responsible for delivering psychological therapies to people seeking help for common mental health problems in primary care (London School of Economics, 2006). We estimated that the demand for such interventions, the service models that might deliver increased capacity for psychological treatments, the implications for workforce numbers and the impact that this would have on education and training. Much of the thinking that was adopted within the review was based on current development work around the mental health workforce led by the National Workforce Programme sponsored by the National Institute for Mental Health England (NIMHE) on New Ways of Working (NWW).The current paper reflects on the process and the added value that NWW has contributed to what is a radical new venture, which has been described by the lead evaluator of the pilot Improving Access for Psychological Therapies (IAPT) phase, Professor Glenys Parry, as 'the industrialisation of psychological therapies'. More specifically, it reviews the implementation of a national programme designated as IAPT, which was commissioned on the basis of the NWW work, and the evidence accrued from the IAPT national demonstration sites at Doncaster and Newham, together with the efforts of Lord Layard and the New Savoy Partnership.The first year implementation of IAPT is described, together with the lessons learned from the roll out. As the programme has developed, it has become important to ensure that clients also have a choice of evidence-based interventions. NWW has provided a means to help practitioners come together from a range of therapeutic orientations and professions to contribute to this more diverse workforce. Finally, it is argued that NWW has been instrumental in helping managers and professions alike think more flexibly about service models and provision, and how to develop a new workforce competent to deliver such an innovative service. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses physiological changes which happen to the body when human beings sit and discusses societal changes which have resulted in humans being in the seated position for extended periods of time on a daily basis. A discussion of research which has investigated the health risks of sitting for extended periods of time and the health benefits of physical activity is presented.

This article examines a number of policy challenges and dilemmas arising from the pattern of growth and poverty reduction in Asia, central to which is the fact that growth and poverty reduction have been more rapid in Asia than in any other region in the last decade, and yet Asia still contains the majority of the world's poor. The article examines the record of achievement, possible future trends including emerging patterns of inequality, and likely future priorities for poverty-reduction policies. It assesses the role of official development assistance and suggests how it may evolve in future, in part linked with responses to a number of challenges shared between Asian and OECD countries, including energy supply, environmental issues including climate change, and financial stability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]