A-Z of mental health
Information and advice on a huge range of mental health topics
Local people, local power, local change - can the Lib Dems deliver?
Posted Friday 24 September 2010
Traditionally, the Liberal Democrat conference has been an excellent place to start the Party Conference season. Security was low key, delegates warm and friendly with a hint of the hippy tradition. Media coverage was relatively light and it could easily fall off the agenda if something more exciting happened.
That was then. The Lib Dems are now a party of government, so this conference was quite unlike any I’ve been to before. Security was tightened up, there seemed to be far more people in suits with only the occasional glimpse of the traditional sandal, and when I walked past Huw Edwards, I realised that the Lib Dems' moment has definitely arrived.
Fortunately one thing that hasn’t changed is the party’s interest and commitment to mental health. Previous conferences have had motions on mental health, and MPs and Peers have always been receptive to issues about mental health. I believe it’s good news that the Mental Health Minister is Paul Burstow, who we met at Conference. He will lead the forthcoming mental health strategy and was receptive to our messages which I set out in last week’s blog.
Nick Clegg’s speech was also interesting. I sat in the main hall to hear him – he was well received by a party which hasn’t tasted government for a very long time and is slowly getting used to the idea. His message about “local people, local power, local change” is an important one. We know from our own network of local Mind associations that locally led and delivered services make a difference.
Other conference highlights included the colourful Bob Russell proving that the Lib Dems will always encourage debate, delegates talking about the importance of protecting the vulnerable in the upcoming cuts, politicians finally talking about the damaging effect some of the rhetoric around welfare has been for people on benefits, and Liverpool proving itself an excellent Conference venue.
So the bandwagon moves on to Manchester and the Labour Conference. We'll be offering a stress test to all delegates to get them talking about our campaign for better mental health at work – come visit us at stand 74 if you're there! We'll also be pressing Labour politicians and the new leader to make sure mental health is a key priority for them as the expected cuts start to take effect after the upcoming Government's spending review.
What else should we be talking about at Conference? Who will win the leadership contest? Will Blair’s diaries outsell Mandelson’s at the book stands? Leave your answers in the comments!
Paul Farmer is Mind's Chief Executive
33 Comments
-
Are you kidding Paul?
The Libdems have utterly sold out for their 15 mins of fame and have buckled over to all the tory policies on mental health and welfare.
As for what else you should be talking about to Labour I think that should be obvious from the blogs here this year - welfare, cuts to services, and the political incitement of hatred towards us which they never challnge in the media. We have no advocates in parliament.
I don't think any of us care about Blairs diaries we're trying to work out how to stay alive -
How about discussing lack of accountability within the UK mental health charity sector Paul ? as you lot and your increasingly coercive and irrelevant Time to Change campaign are as treacherous and out of touch as Clegg is.
-
If the party’s interest and commitment to mental health hasn't changed, why am I sitting here planning my own funeral ready for next year when the ESA migration starts proper and some inadequate ATOS quack with targets to meet tells me I'm not ill?
Time for Mind to take off its rose-tinted glasses and acknowledge what's happening to us at the sharp, painful, dull and unglamorous end of the scale. I don't care who's wearing sandals or suits, I want to know if it's worth me buying another year's TV Licence or will I not be around to use it! As for Blair & Mandelson's books, let's hope no-one buys them and they all get thrown out the back of the shop so when we're living on the streets we can take them and use them as protection against the cold hard concrete.
-
Better mental health at work!!!
What about getting the help those with mental health problems should be getting from the so called professionals to begin with.
I have suffered with severe depression since I was in my teens nearly 20 years on I finally have a GP that is willing to help me but even she is bemused by the lack of help I have received from the professionals she has refered me to that are supposed to be there to help.
There are plenty more others in my area whose problems are worse than mine and have had no help from those that are supposedly trained to help them. -
Janine i'm in same situation as yourself. 8 months it took for social works to get monies sorted out back dated by 3 months. 8 months bills to cover by 3 months income. Can't afford the debt as a result. Was constantly getting offered things to purchase by the appointed support worker as well once my monies did get sorted. That pressure was just to much so asked them not to come back. Got no one to help now. If those Lib Dems cared at all they would not have left myself as well as others without monies or food and left to starve this past 6 months the acumalation is adding to the already debt suffered by the lack of support from socail workers. I can't see any way forward now. I couldn't attend the assessment as i couldn't face going over and over my past and for the past to be constantly recalled upon to justify a benifit its a contradiction of all the work the doctors and others help myself move out of. Simply can't do it any more.
-
Dear Mr Farmer,
I am afraid Mr Farmer that you and the elite at the top of the disability charities are just wrong praising up these millionaires and wealthy individuals and offering token gestures in our defence in my opinion.
Mr Farmer you must know by now that the aim of welfare reform is to scrap sickness benefit altogether either by means testing, demedicalised assessments, (Can do) forced labour and repeat medicals so even those that get ESA first time lose it on the second medical.
A massive majorities of those individuals will never get meaningful paid employment that benefits their mental health and wellbeing. Its a utopian dream. especially in the coming economic with mass unemployment for even those that are well and which may continue for many years.
MIND and the rest of the charities involved with welfare reform will be finished if you do not start fighting our corner in a more substantial way in my view. Who cares about your jolly at the conferences, you should be visiting those that are going to have a terrible time in the coming years. Too many conferences in my view.
You may have noticed the leaked document on the possibility of disablily quangos closing, well it is my belief that donations to MIND will be next when relatives Carers and users are on the receiving end of a vindictive government in the coming months,
Even the" big society" and forced workfare will not help charities in my view such will be the resentment, illness suffered by the victims of welfare reform and service cuts.
Mental health services are going down hill, many are going to lose their homes and benefits and face years of unemployment and bullying from the establisment.
Could I ask also if you or any of the elite of these disablilities charities actually suffer from mental illness yourselves?
It is a personal question but why should you not be asked what yours and the top executives of MIND's personal experience of mental illness actually is,
I know the trustees are sufferers but it is the highly paid executives that rarely discuss their own circumstances.
As for new labour they could not care less about the mentally ill, they brought in the draconian welfare reform act, the Tories have just carried on in perhaps an even more extreme way.
best wishes
Paul
-
I just cannot believe this blog from a CEO, everyone is worried sick and you are joking about memoirs/diaries, suits and sandals. I'm just speechless.
-
Mind! you are not in the real world anymore,address the real issues please or keep quiet- you are not doing us any favours and you are certainly not helping.
-
I think Mind should include a financial Conflict of Interest statement when commenting on government things like this, given that so much money passes from the government to Mind. As in contracts to deliver services on behalf of the government, which seems to constitute the majority of the funding of the aforementioned local Mind associations.
And given that Mind leads the way in refusing to be compromised by drug company money, why no mention of the horrendous ongoing abuse of science by drug companies? The government won't like it of course, being always desperate to keep these big businesses happy.
Really hope those struggling financially get the support they should be getting and that they can carry on through this time.
-
While attending the political conferences it is worth remembering the fear voiced through the comments sections and directly to Mind about all impending changes. Those with mental health problems will be disproportionally affected given the tightening spending effects on health services and the slashing of the welfare budget. There are threats to local charities and advice providers (due to local authorities having their funding allocations cut by 25% projected). It would be hard to face the future positively whatever group of society, or with good mental health, but more so when it seems as though resources we rely on will only (and entirely) be taken away.
Hopefully the chief executive of Mind will be a strong advocate for those with ongoing mental health problems, who may suddenly be pushed into new situations - far from doing us a favour they feel too much pressure with too little support.
Even with talking therapies - as Mind praises - the local experience is of very much time limited help such as three-six sessions maximum, group work or computerised therapy even where someone has complex life issues. And still with waiting lists. Therapy spread across so many people seems less successful than targeting longer periods of therapy (beyond CBT) to those who have significant mental health issues which affect their life choices, work, family lives, daily survival - or those who miss out on much of this since damage has already been done and they need full support to find their way back.
I am really scared of the spending review, what it will mean for myself and others who have a lot to lose including health gains made. As much as recovery (rather than cure) is promoted by mental health services it seems as though other sections of society's support network don't respond to this with the same understanding.
An upbeat account of a political conference doesn't ease my anxieties.
But I trust that Mind will continue to question what is happening, listen to its users feedback and get the best settlements wherever possible.
-
We have three weeks until the savage cuts on the 20th October. Three weeks to find as much support as we can from politicians. Come and help other disabled people and carers fight to protect benefits at CarerWatch.
We fight hard.
-
Wow, that was painful to read. I just wish I was in Mr Farmer's position of being able to get all jolly well excited over conferences and yearly bog-standard soundbites over general blahblahblah and token gestures. I'm sure your covered Mr Farmer, but I'm with 'Mindreader' - - I'm still trying to work how the hell I'm going to survive.
-
To all commenters,
I'm sorry that the tone of my post seems to have rung hollow with some of our readers. Rest assured we do read every single comment posted on this blog, and they have and will continue to inform the work that we do.
I'm in Manchester for the Labour Party Conference, where we're meeting with MPs and shadow ministers to see how we can work together to shape any upcoming legislation that will have on people with experience of mental distress - welfare reform and budget cuts are both firmly on the agenda. I'll be writing again later this week, so check back in a few days for a fuller update.
-Paul Farmer -
I won't be holding my breath - it doesn't seem like the comments here have informed the work you're doing so far.
Too little, too late.
-
As well as seconding much of what the above posters have said, I would like to point out that the network of local Mind associations may not survive much longer if the experience in my area is anything to go by. Our centre was largely funded by a block grant from the county council. This arrangement will cease from March next year. This is despite the fact that it is the only place here that supplies information and support for service users, offering friendship groups, one-to-one befriending and all sorts of craft groups, IT lessons, health checks, healthy living groups, reflexology and massage sessions and a lot more besides.
What little information the council is giving us is largely through letters to the local newspaper! We understand that they expect us to fund the group ourselves through personal budgets, But we`ve know idea if we`ll be eligible as some of us don`t have a CPN or support worker, and if we do get some money this way, at a time of cuts we don`t know if it`ll be enough. I think that Mind needs to highlight these problems because I doubt that ours is the only local Mind centre to be facing this situation. -
Please Mr Farmer - just say NO. The disability charities have gone along with these welfare reforms long enough. Blair followed Clinton's third way and moved from welfare to workfare. Now we have savage cuts coming and the disabled are being demonised. The fear and distress this is causing is terrible.
People with disability need to know they are safe. They need to be able to access back to work help when and if they want it and otherwise they need secure benefits that are unconditional. The disability charities have to stop going along with the new government line that everyone is fit for work and can be pressurised in to work. The charities need to stand up for disabled people and stop acting like government service providers and start representing the fears and realities of disabled people.
-
The comment below is one i recently posted in response to the DWPs consultation on 21st Century Welfare and hopefully echoes some of the anger and fear expressed in the Mind blogs.
"As many of the people who end up on long-term JSA are claimants with mental health conditions and other disabilities, who have had their sickness benefit (IB/ESA) withdrawn following a poor/unfair medical – i would be extremely wary of any conditionality/threat of sanctions. Applying any kind of stick approach to such a vulnerable client group is not only inhumane and totally unacceptable, it is also counter-productive. People will become distressed, destabilized and disengaged. People will lose their homes – those admitted to psychiatric wards may end up being the lucky ones.
I welcome third sector charities and voluntary organisations running schemes to support people with complex needs into meaningful and sustainable employment (this concept is nothing new – the Richmond Fellowship and others have been supporting people with mental health conditions on a voluntary basis for years).
However, questions have to be asked about any social enterprise schemes such as Fourth Sector offering ‘long-term’ work placements for people with mental health conditions.
Whilst i assume Parkview Laundry’s working conditions and ethos have moved on from the old Magdalene Laundries – i personally would find such repetitive, low-skilled work in a possibly hot/damp environment intolerable. It is outrageous that people with mental health conditions are working for an average of two years without being paid a proper wage.
I would like to see evidence of social enterprise schemes leading to varied (including professional), flexible and sustainable employment for people with mental health conditions and other disabilities."
I strongly agree with Frances who states that "People with disability need to know they are safe. They need to be able to access back to work help when and if they want it and otherwise they need secure benefits that are unconditional."
It is truly apalling that people are losing their sickness benefits as a result of being forced to attend frightening and unethical medicals.
In order to avoid an escalating mental health crisis in the UK, Mind needs to redirect energy and resources, joining forces with other organisations to fight the current direction of welfare reform and cuts to vital mental health services.
-
Our "representatives", be they politicians or organisations such as Mind seem to live in their own little bubbles.
Politicians do politics and the conferences give them the chance to show their supporters how well they do it. Hence the "bog-standard soundbites over general blahblahblah and token gestures" (well said, nim). Meetings and discussions about various issues are just part of the process and, as long as the right thing is said to the right person, they can claim that progress has been made.
While not doubting his good intentions, it seems that Mr Farmer does mental health. Attending conferences gives him the chance to show how well he does it. Having been told what he wants to hear by a politician who really couldn't care less about the issue, he assumes he's made progress.
"MPs and Peers have always been receptive to issues about mental health" Who are these MPs and Peers? Just because they are put in positions where they have to politely listen does not mean they are receptive at all. If they were receptive they would be speaking out loudly about what is going on.
"...I walked past Huw Edwards..."
"What else should we be talking about at Conference?"
"welfare reform and budget cuts are both firmly on the agenda"You should be talking about our concerns surrounding the effects of the cuts and this welfare "reform". You should be showing the "MPs and Peers" (and maybe even Huw Edwards) the comments left in these blog posts over the last couple of months. The comments are from real people, living in fear and dread of what is going to happen to them and the services they rely on.
How can there be any question as to what you should be talking about?
-
People writing to their MP's about welfare need to be aware of something - if you're a claimant they can pass your details directly to the DWP without your permission, it happened to someone I know. He ended up being named in a paper as well without his consent.
This is another reason Paul why organisations need to speak for individuals -
http://www.24dash.com/news/communities/2010-09-22-Duncan-Smith-Social-enterprise-critical-to-helping-people-back-into-work
I suspect such placements will become mandatory, working for two years whilst remaining on benefits then being placed on JSA and expected to find real paid work because two years of pretend unpaid work would prove the person was capable of working. This will become the 'stepping stone' instead of voluntary work -
hold on a minute! how does this equate with the mininum wage!? two years unpaid work for the mentally ill? why isn't this headline news and as they are singling out a particular group for this is this not discriminatory? This is exploitation at its worst and is almost victorian in it's concept. It also assumes that people with mental health problems are not capable of anything other than sweat shop labour. I'd like to know how the Govt are going to get round this one seeing as everyone else has the right to a minimum wage. Is this what happens to people who have no voice?
-
I was at the Lib Dem conference as a delegate, I am a Borough councillor and I also manage a Mind advocacy project in Hampshire. There were a large number of fringe meetings around the health and social care agenda, I attended a very good one about personalisation the Care Minister, Paul Burstow was at. We also had a main hall Q&A session on Pensions & Benefits with four LibDem ministers, again inc. Paul Burstow. I asked a question about how the govt. was going to help get people back into work when stats show over 70% of employers woudn't even interview someone with declared MH issues. There were plenty of others at the conference who like me work in the voluntary & public sector and like any good advocate, I will continue to ensure our service users voices are heard by those who have decision making power, which is why I am glad Paul Farmer was at our conference
-
.Dear Louise Bloom
You asked this question at the Lib dem conference which I have copied and pasted below
" I asked a question about how the govt. was going to help get people back into work when stats show over 70% of employers woudn't even interview someone with declared MH issues. "
Perhaps you could tell service users what the Minister's Paul Burstow reply was to this very relevant question you asked.
Best wishes
Paul
were plenty of
-
All personalisation means is getting a Direct Payment to pay for local Mind/Rethink groups/activities which are currently free. Personalisation will mean that everything people get for free now will have to be funded this way in the full knowledge that many people won't even be eligible for it.
Government knows employers do not want anyone with psychiatric history and even not having to declare it makes no difference, employers are not stupid, they can work it out when someone hasn't been in paid work for 5,10, 20 years.
They have no intention of 'helping' other than to transfer everyone to JSA and get people into unpaid or minimum wage manual labour. -
Thank you Louise for your reassurance that questions were being raised at the Lib Dem conference.
I too would like to know the answer you received to your very important question?
Whilst employers remain reluctant to employ someone with a declared mental health condition - this is a major barrier and exacerbated by the current lack of jobs. It is inappropriate to feel pressurized into looking for work when the odds of finding sustainable employment are so highly stacked against us.
I have heard talk of employers no longer being allowed to ask questions about mental health issues on application forms, but this must not be in force yet as there are still all sorts of questions about whether you have a mental illness/ how many days you have had off sick in the last two years? etc.
There are also issues concerning whether you are covered by the the DDA regarding any special adjustments you may need if you decide not not to declare a mental health condition when applying for a job.
What real hope is out there for people who haven't worked for years due to poor mental health?
I welcome the government coming up with more flexible ways of employing people with fluctuating conditions, however, any kind of 'stick approach' is totally counter-productive - compounding illness and limiting any level of recovery or prospect of a return to work.
-
@Patsy - the ban on pre-employment questionnaires actually comes into force tomorrow as part of the Equality Act. While we are pleased that the ban is about to become law, the work to make sure it is implemented and monitored effectively is about to begin. See here for a bit more information http://www.mind.org.uk/policy/equality_and_human_rights/the_equality_bill/pre-employment_questionnaires
-
Eve, employers ask for sickness records.
Employers work out that if someone hasn't been in paid employment [which will be obvious from a CV] for 5,10,15,20 years that unless they won the lottery and travelled the world it's likely to be because of a enduring condition, so banning pre-employment questionnaires makes no difference to people who have not been in paid employment for longer than a few months, it's obvious and here's no way around it.
Then Occupational Health depts can be discriminatory against certain diagnoses. 70% of employers don't want people with psych histories. Retail and low paid jobs don't offer sick pay and readily get rid of people who are sick for too long, it's only the NHS and police who offer pay for months these days -
Latest on benefit cuts, Article says details may be announced at Conservative Party Conference next week.
Paul
-
Well Louise Bloom was keen to tell us that she asked a question at a conference meeting but interestingly omitted to tell us the answer (if she got one).
I'm still waiting to see or hear any of the "MPs and Peers" who "have always been receptive to issues about mental health" actually stand up and speak in our defence.
Pre-employment questionnaires are now banned. So of course it will be our fault we can't get jobs because an employer isn't allowed to discriminate!
IDS saves £9bn. Implementation of the universal credit gives government the perfect excuse to re-assess all benefit claims. IDS intends to "save" the £9bn, so does anyone here claiming benefit think they will still have the same income after universal credit is in place?
How many bankers and tax evaders do you think have mental health problems and face having their income reduced in the near future?
-
When IDS refers to people being better off working than on benefits what he means is reducing benefits as opposed to raising the minimum wage significantly.
The only aspect I can agree on is child benefit, people earning £100,000+ don't really need child benefit. Ditto do millionaires need post 65 pensions? Tax evasion is what really needs to be addressed before any benefits are cut because this is worth billions and is often big business and high end again.
Another thing which would make a difference is part-time work being topped up with benefits but not for a short term period, how will that help, it would need to be permanent for people who are able to do part-time work but no more without risking their health. Now why should those people live in poverty. Surely if someone can work 2 days a week it would be better to top up that salary up to what it would be on IB/DLA high rates because it would mean there is still a saving. I doubt this new system would ever allow for such flexibility, it will still come down to being either totally sick or fit for full-time work [if part-time means not having enough to cover the cost of living] -
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/oct/01/twitter-benefit-cheat-nadine-dorries
Could MIND ask this MP at the Tory Party conference if her comments are true about disabled people using the internet?
Together with the Universal credit, with not a chance of employment, there will be plenty for the disablility charities and others involved in social care to challenge these individuals on.
I would email her myself but she might want to take my IB off me by deviously reporting my email. As I said before they are trying to silence opposition to this witchhunt.
Paul
-
I believe that Ms. Dorries sits on the Health Select Committee, so her outburst is truly concerning but demonstrates perfectly the uninformed, biased attitudes we are facing.
In an interview with Andrew Neil (Today at Conference, BBC2 4th October), IDS was asked about the support that would be in place to get people back into work. During his explanation he used a very telling phrase "... we will make you ready for work..." and added "... if you are offered a job and you don't take it, the state will withdraw its support...". "Make you ready for work". How? For those of us with enduring mental health problems, what will be the definition of "ready for work" and will that imply a recognition of "not ready for work"?
IDS also said "...this is the only way to cut the deficit...".
Further in, Andrew Neil cited an example of the American Welfare To Work system, saying that they use teams of people to go to people's homes and ask why they haven't got up, washed, dressed and either gone to work, or gone to look for it. He asked IDS if his department was ready for that sort of approach. IDS replied "Yes."
The coalition keeps telling us there is a deficit and that there is nothing more important than tackling that deficit. We are told there is "no money", we "cannot afford" this or that. But... £20bn for a high speed rail link between London and Birmingham - "...it's part of a larger project... and is important" and increasing foreign aid "...because it's the right thing to do..."
I'm sick of hearing the coalition bang on about making "tough but fair decisions". I've said it before, MPs and ministers making these decisions are completely unaffected by them. "We're all in this together". Yes, but some of us more than others.
-
To those who asked the reponse I got to my question about stigma and employment, Paul Burstow pointed out as others have the law on health questions changed on 1st october, so they can only be asked AFTER an employment offer has been made, however clearly gaps in CVs will still show. He also talked about the new Health White Paper coming out that will specifically refer to stigma and also the need for more training & awareness raising. It was all a bit wooly, but I am confident the issue is one being taken seriously and there are plenty of people like me to makle sure it does!
Commenting is now closed.