Search

Background: This paper reports on the first qualitative study to interview people prescribed cannabis in the UK. Cannabis is a class B controlled substance under the 1971 Misuse of Drugs (MoD) Act, but a 2018 change to UK regulations provided for the prescription of cannabis for medical purposes. Relatively few people have been able to access a prescription, despite this policy change. This paper examines their experiences., Methods: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 24 people with a prescription for cannabis, or their carers. Data was analysed using a reflextive thematic analysis approach. The findings are discussed using a zemiology (social harms) perspective which provides a language for critical reflection on the current cannabis policy context., Results: All participants reported that cannabis had significantly improved their mental and/or physical health, across a broad range of conditions. Many had been able to reduce their use of conventional medicines and reported that cannabis had relatively few side effects. Despite the potentially life-enhancing benefits of cannabis medicine, patients in the UK face multiple barriers to access. These include a lack of funding streams, bureaucratic supply problems, and a lack of training for doctors and police. Even for the few people able to obtain a prescription, the ongoing criminalisation of cannabis in the UK contributed to their experiences of stigmatisation. This often made it difficult and anxiety-inducing to take their medicine in public spaces., Conclusion: The UK government's lack of implementation of medical cannabis legalisation, combined with their ongoing prohibition position, is producing multiple harms to people who need cannabis medicine. The policy context is perpetuating stigmatising attitudes to cannabis which, as we demonstrate, contribute to social harms. We make recommendations on equality of patient access, and highlight the importance of education and policy change as means of combatting stigma., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Improving Access to Psychological Therapies has lead to a huge increase in the delivery of psychological therapy within the United Kingdom over the past 10 years. Central to the culture of Improving Access to Psychological Therapies is outcome monitoring, brought into every therapeutic encounter through the compulsory collection of the minimum data set in each session. This article explores the role of compulsory outcome monitoring in service users' experiences of using Improving Access to Psychological Therapies, with a focus on how these forms are folded into distress, therapy and recovery. Data from a small-scale qualitative study are drawn upon. Thematic analysis was conducted on multimodal interviews with current service users. The article explores the ways in which the minimum data set acted as a 'quasi object', exploring three main roles of the minimum data set: as an authorising mediator, an alienating adversary and a deferring gatekeeper. Pictures of therapeutic progress, as presented via outcome measures, often ran counter to users' reported experience of distress. We conclude that far from being a neutral and objective assessment tool, the minimum data set functions as a living actant in the therapeutic encounter.

Aim: To determine UK genetic counselors' (UKGCs) opinion regarding 'the psychosocial component of the UKGC remit in the new genomics era'. Methods: Facilitated discussions at a national conference (2016) using interactive methodologies (58 participants). Results: UKGCs recognized the rapid rate of change emerging with advances in genomic science. Change will be required to the UKGC remit and the roles, rules, relationships and responsibilities that underpin it (29 topics identified). UKGCs supported their 'unique selling point'; integrating knowledge and the explicit focus on psychosocial aspects of genomic healthcare. By 2019, some of the aspirations have been achieved. Conclusion: UKGCs should proactively position themselves to capitalize on the challenges and opportunities of genomic healthcare to maximize patient benefit.

There is ample evidence that loneliness and social isolation are important in the development of distress, and harmful to recovery. UK mental health services, however, have been moving away from interventions which prioritise relationality, and towards professionally-led, individualised treatments. In addition, those experiencing distress experience multiple spatial exclusions which can compound isolation and loneliness. This paper examines the role of an urban Walk and Talk group in the lives of long term mental health service users. Using an ecological frame, Ingold's concept of 'meshwork' is used to explore the complex of social, personal and spatial relationships which contribute to participants' experiences of everyday living. Four themes are explored: Fading lines: Fossilised meshworks of loneliness and loss; Therapeutic nodes: Atomised sanctuary and respite in everyday space; Reciprocity and authenticity: Strengthening relational meshworks; and Remaking everyday spaces: Revitalising meshworks through collectivity. The findings are discussed in light of the literature on loneliness, relationships and mental health interventions., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)