Search

Mental ill health is a universal phenomenon: that is, it is seen across all cultures and societies, even though the presentation may be culture-specific and affected by cultural norms and more. Governments have a moral and ethical duty to develop mental health services which are accessible, appropriate, and non-discriminatory. Equity in funding mental health services is critical. As globally services and their quality vary dramatically, one should be proposing and agreeing on minimum standards of care. In this paper the basic components and minimum standards of care are described. It is imperative that services are non-discriminatory. It is important that governments work with psychiatrists, other mental health professionals, and individuals with mental illness, their families, and carers to plan, develop, and deliver services with adequate funding. Employers and psychological first aid must also be remembered. Services must be geographically accessible. In this endeavour primary care services have a major role to play. Training and clinical decision-making must be part of the change in service delivery. It is imperative that every effort is made to keep the population mentally as well as physically healthy, and people who develop mental illness must have access to evidence-based treatment at the earliest possible opportunity. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: This paper is concerned with the issue of service user involvement in education and training within psychological therapy training within the UK. Aims: In particular this paper reflects on the literature on user involvement to gain a deep understanding of its status in the education and training of psychological therapists. Method: A systematic search of the literature indicates minimal involvement from service users in the education and training of psychological therapists. Results: The possible reasons for this are discussed, along with what service users might want from such involvement, what it might add to psychological therapies training, the models of involvement that might be adopted, how service users may be recruited and how they may be involved in the various stages of the educational process, from commissioning, through delivery, to evaluation of programmes. Conclusion: If service user involvement in psychological therapy training is carefully planned, supported and evaluated, it could improve the trainees' practice, so that it reflected the priorities and wishes of those receiving the service. Nevertheless, it is currently an underdeveloped area within contemporary psychological educational practice. Declaration of interests: None. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This paper examines the experiences and perspectives of ex-military servicemen in the UK. It focuses specifically on the complex links between emotional distress and various constructions of ‘masculinity’ in a military context. Aspects of military culture that exacerbate vulnerability and also those that are protective to mental health are identified and discussed with reference to the theoretical constructs relating to hegemonic masculinity. A qualitative research design using semi-structured interviews provided in-depth accounts of the experiences of 20 ex-servicemen aged 23–44, all but one of whom were in the Army. We found that in a military setting hegemonic masculinity is embedded in the construction of a soldier identity and expression of emotion may be seen as inappropriate. As a result soldiers often lack a language with which to express distress (in a context in which they may witness extremely distressing events), which may result in delays in recognising and treating mental health problems. However, constructions of masculinity in this setting to some degree also promote a caring, sharing ethos based on strong inter-dependent bonds. A young soldier who can cope with the stresses of military life ‘becomes a man’, adopts a masculine/soldier identity and is well-placed to benefit from these protective factors, notably the camaraderie that is part of service life. In this manner a caring ethos in which some admissions of weakness may be permissible is situated within hegemonic masculinity. This seeming paradox between hyper masculinity and caring masculinities appears to be embedded within military culture, perhaps reflecting the flexibility and ambiguity inherent in constructions of hegemonic masculinity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]