Welcome to Mind's blog
Each week we'll be posting items on a whole range of topics relating in some way to mental health. We hope to stimulate debate and get you thinking about mental health and Mind's work in a new way.
We welcome comments and questions on our posts, but have a few ground rules to keep the site welcoming and interesting to every body. The first rule is the most important: be respectful of other commenters and bloggers. Read the rest of our comments policy.
Please note that some blog posts may not reflect official Mind policy.
Discrimination and stigma:
-
8 February 2010
“Keep an eye on her, she’s crazy”A guest post by Izzi, who writes the How to Juggle Glass blog
I was in a pharmacy and handed in my prescription and went to loiter around the shop while they made it up for me. Now, the thing you should know is that I take some “serious” medications and it appears the pharmacist had noticed this. I was minding my own business, looking at lipstick or some other tat, when I heard the pharmacist whisper to the assistant:
“Keep an eye on her, she’s crazy”
It would appear that the pharmacist thought that I was going to steal something or maybe start proclaiming myself to be Jesus in the shop. I have no idea what was actually going through his mind at the time, but come on; I’m just trying to get through life/uni/work etc. I’m not out to make some kind of scene in your pharmacy.
No matter how hard I try to ignore the “crazy” comments and get on with my life, there are some that hurt deep down. I try so hard and yet sometimes I still feel like I will always be “that crazy person”. If I had a broken leg then it would be fine; but because I have something that cannot be seen and people don’t fully understand then it will have an impact on how people treat me and how I can live my life.
This feeling haunts me wherever I go. I’m always waiting for the next time someone treats me like this.
Izzi
14 Comments -
19 January 2010
Mental health stigma alive and well and on the airwavesThe news that Manchester radio DJ Steve Penk played the Van Halen song ‘Jump’ for motorists delayed by a road closure when a woman attempted to take her own life from a bridge, is a stark reminder of the distance we still have to go to tackle mental health discrimination.
Apparently the request for the song came from local motorists inconvenienced by the closures, which the Revolution DJ honoured moments before she jumped. Although he is in no way to blame for what happened, few people would argue that his actions weren't in incredibly poor taste.
He has since stood by his decision saying "I don't regret playing it for a minute" and that he empathised with the inconvenienced drivers. It is a sad state of affairs when as a society we start to view someone else’s tragedy as a personal inconvenience. Surely if the frustrated motorists stopped to think that this was a human life at stake, someone's daughter or friend, they would not be so flippant. Anyone who has ever lost a loved one to suicide will know how terrible the affects are for family and friends.
Over 100 people a week take their own life in the UK. The fear of stigma means that many people experiencing mental distress feel unable to speak to loved ones and as a consequence they suffer in silence. I only hope that the publicity surrounding this event might make the public question their own understanding of mental health issues. In the 21st century, is it too much to ask that we show compassion and understanding for people who are in the depths of despair?
Mind and the Samaritans will be complaining to Ofcom about the show, and we urge you to lodge your own complaint. Please include the following information about the programme:Name of the show: Steve Penk at Breakfast
Radio station: 96.2FM Revolution Radio
Transmission date: Thursday 14 January 2010Please note that the Ofcom site wil not find any information for Revolution Radio. To make your complaint, just select "Continue" below the message that you get about this, and then on the next screen select "I saw/heard the programme".
Alison Kerry, Head of Media
17 Comments -
19 January 2010
Will pre-employment health checks be a thing of the past?According to psychologist Cliff Arnall, yesterday was the most depressing day of the year. Well may be so, but there was at least one reason to be cheerful: the government tabled an amendment to its Equality Bill which will ban pre-employment health questionnaires.
PEQs are routinely sent out with job application forms, and ask applicants to disclose information about current and previous health conditions, medications they are taking, and so on. Ostensibly employers need this information simply to ensure that the candidate is fit for the role in question, and a quick Google search will tell you that PEQs are a “vital”, “useful” or even “fundamental” part of the recruitment process.
Frankly, I’m not convinced. PEQs give employers an opportunity to ‘weed out’ the applicants that they don’t like the look of, because they have a mental health problem (or indeed any other health condition). And because it’s done at the application stage, this type of discrimination is virtually undetectable – you may strongly suspect that the reason you didn’t get invited to interview is because of your mental health history, but how on earth will you prove it?
Not all discrimination is quite so deliberate of course. Some employers might assume a person with mental health problems is unsuitable not out of malice, but out of ignorance, or misunderstanding. But the consequence for the applicant is the same – soul destroying, confidence-shattering rejection.
PEQs also deter many applicants from applying for jobs in the first place, because they predict that stigma towards mental health will mean their application form is automatically stuck on the ‘no’ pile. No wonder, given fewer than four in ten employers say they would employ anyone with a mental health problem.
There is simply no reason to include a health questionnaire at this stage of the recruitment process. Applicants should be judged on their ability to do the job, not on their medical diagnosis, and the inclusion of a PEQ detracts from this. If an applicant’s health condition means he or she will need extra in-work support to do the job, then so be it – but let’s ask those questions after the interview, not before. After all, employers have a statutory duty to provide reasonable adjustments for employees with mental health problems, to help them fulfill the role, but PEQs enable many to quietly shirk this duty.
The USA and several European countries already have legislation preventing employers from asking about health until after a conditional job offer has been made.
Thankfully, after many meetings and intense pressure, letters, and briefings from Mind and other health charities, the government has decided to address this loophole. The amendment tabled yesterday (69A* if you’re interested) prevents employers from asking questions about health prior to interview (except in very limited circumstances), and gives the Equality and Human Rights Commission powers of enforcement, to ensure employers comply.
We can’t crack open the champagne just yet; the Bill isn’t an Act and there are some who believe it never will be, due to lack of parliamentary time. But if it does go through, it will be a real victory for untold numbers of people with mental health problems who are trying to return to work.
Louise Kirsh, Parliamentary Officer
1 Comment -
15 January 2010
An end to discrimination in parliament?Politicians made some very encouraging noises on the subject of mental health discrimination this week.
First came the report from the Speaker’s Conference Inquiry on Parliamentary Representation (PDF file). Hidden away on page 101, but no less important for it, was the recommendation that an archaic, discriminatory piece of mental health legislation be repealed. The law in question, section 141 of the 1983 Mental Health Act, stipulates that an MP who receives 6 months or more medical treatment for a serious mental health problem should be removed from his or her seat.
The assumption, of course, is that those who have been affected by mental illness couldn’t possibly cope with, or be trusted to cope with, the demands of being an MP.
In 2008 the cross-party parliamentary group on mental health published a survey which found that one in five MPs had experienced a mental health problem. So what message does section 141 send to them? Does it encourage them to speak openly about their condition, to deal with mental illness in a calm, grown-up fashion, and to seek help where necessary? Or does it scream, “whatever you do, don't admit to it or you'll never work again”?
The Speaker’s Conference inquiry decided S141 is more likely to send out the latter message, and that “it embodies attitudes which stigmatize and sap the confidence of people with mental illness.” Well said.
Such a law would never be tolerated in relation to debilitating physical illness, as Lynne Jones MP pointed out at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday. That the Prime Minister then acknowledged the importance of the issue bodes well for a repeal of the legislation.
On a less positive note, ministers have turned their backs on a 2004 promise to review the jury service rules, which currently exclude those who are receiving treatment for mental health problems from sitting on a jury. The rules are based on the same unacceptable and outdated assumption as S141 – that people with mental health problems just aren’t capable of taking on this level of responsibility. These are exactly the sort of assumptions that our politicians should be fighting against and it's disappointing, to say the least, that in this case they have chosen not to do so. Still, Rome wasn’t built in a day….
Louise Kirsh, Parliamentary Officer
1 Comment -
27 November 2009
Marcus Trescothick: a sackful of sporting trophies won't beat off depression
As a person who has experienced mental health problems, I know how vital it is for people to understand that they are not alone when depression.I hope the interviews with Frank Bruno, New Zealand All Black John Kirwan, snooker star Ronnie O'Sullivan, footballer Neil Lennon and others on the BBC Inside Sport's Mind Games documentary will serve to show that the illness can strike even those at the top of their game.
As I have said before depression is an illness not a weakness and you cannot beat it off with a CV or a bank balance... or a sackful of sporting trophies.
From a personal perspective, my own part in the programme, based on the video diary I kept while touring India with Somerset, made interesting viewing for me. In the end I had to come home early but the fact I made it out there in the first place was a big step forward.
Marcus Trescothick
You can watch Mind Games: Depression in Sport on BBC iPlayer until 11.29pm on Wednesday 2 December.
Katie Prior of Mind's media team writes:
Marcus Trescothick's candour in speaking out about his experiences on the Mind Games documentary deserves praise. He first ‘came out’ in his widely acclaimed autobiography that gave valuable insight into the experience of depression, leading it to be shortlisted for Mind’s Book of the Year Award 2009.
It's this sort of honesty from public figures about their experience of mental health problems that can help lesson the stigma that contributed to German goalkeeper Robert Enke's death.
Former New Zealand All Black John Kirwan mentioned in the BBC programme that somebody came up to him following his involvement in a mental health awareness campaign to tell him that he had saved their life. That was just one person, out of the many who would have been touched by the experiences he shared, leading him to believe that his involvement with the campaign was “probably more rewarding than playing for the All Blacks”.
Away from the sports field, there was an interview with Fern Britten in today's Times. She rightly spoke without an ounce of shame about her depression. As she so matter of factly said, ‘for me, it’s like being a diabetic’.This is exactly what people need to hear, that everyone has mental health as everyone has physical health. Depression and other mental health problems are no different to having influenza, cancer or a sore knee.
Start the discussion -
19 November 2009
'Keeping schtum' about mental health problemsFollowing the tragic death of German footballer Robert Enke, the difficulties people feel about being open about their mental health experience has made international headlines.
Enke's death has prompted a wave of public sympathy. Strangely, Monday's Financial Times Deutschland article 'The Perils of Revealing Your Illness at Work' doesn't refer to Enke, but it does remind us of the terrible bind so many people find themselves in: be open and risk your job, or stay quiet and risk your health.
The article's author, Lucy Kellaway, claims that it's best to keep quiet about mental health in the workplace. "The truth is that given our ignorance and squeamishness about mental health, it is probably better to shut up about it," she says.
She seems less concerned that 'keeping schtum' about mental health problems can contribute to perpetuating stigma, and in Robert Enke's case, can lead to people feeling they can't continue.The article also takes a swipe at two well known faces of the Time to Change campaign, Stephen Fry and Alastair Campbell, suggesting that their public positions mean that disclosures about their own mental health 'don't count'.
On the contrary, it is their candour that has already helped bring mental health, and the stigma surrounding it, to the forefront of public attention. Every person who is open about their experiences should be applauded, as greater openness about the issue is what we need to break down the stigma that destroys lives.
However, Kellaway is right that admitting to mental health problems at work can be very frightening, and it's often a difficult choice for people to make. Recent research for the Time to Change campaign revealed that 92 per cent of the British public believes admitting to having a mental illness would damage someone's career.
Thankfully, developments in the law are making it less difficult to fight unfair treatment, and more organisations have positive policies on disability and equality at work.
No one should have to choose between their life and their livelihood.
Julia Lamb, Media Team
10 Comments -
12 November 2009
Alastair Campbell: May Robert Enke's death increase understanding of depression
I'm in Austria to make a speech and speak to government communications specialists. The news is wall to wall coverage of the dreadful suicide of top footballer Robert Enke, who had fought depression for years. I have no idea what channel I am watching but there is a calm and dignity to the coverage which adds profoundly to the sense of loss clearly felt right across Germany.
Most moving of all a remarkable interview with his widow Teresa, speaking of how she always tried to be there for him, and aways lived in hope that he would one day be free of his illness.
Politicians from Angela Merkel down are expressing their and their nation's grief. Footballers and coaches are doing the same, many saying they had no idea that the Hannover goalkeeper was ill, let alone liable to take his life.
When news coverage gives way to pictures, set to music, of candles being lit and memorabilia being laid outside the Hannover stadium, and slow motion shots of Enke in action, you almost sense the makings of a Diana moment for Germany.
It is certainly incredibly sad and nobody will ever know what was really going on inside his mind as finally he decided to end his life.
But the only hope to be found in this horrible event is the hope of greater understanding of a disease which is still surrounded by too much stigma and taboo.Alastair Campbell is Mind Champion of the Year. This post was originally published on his personal blog.
Start the discussion -
12 November 2009
German goalkeeper's suicide highlights mental health stigmaAs a long suffering Reading FC fan, and a keen supporter of England, the ups and downs of football are a big part of my life.
So this week's news of the suicide of Germany's goalkeeper Robert Enke is desperately sad for his family and friends, and for football supporters everywhere. Here was a player at the top of his sport who took his own life. Why?
Perhaps the words of his courageous widow give us a clue - "he was fearful he would lose Leila." Enke was depressed and desperately anxious about the consequences of his depression. He feared for his livelihood but most of all he feared that he would lose his adopted daughter. He said that he had deliberately not talked about his mental state.
Sadly, he's not alone. Time to Change, the national campaign to end the discrimination faced by people with mental health problems, found that many people fear disclosing their mental distress to employers, to authorities, even to friends and family. The fear of stigma can in turn lead to a greater sense of isolation and despair. In some tragic circumstances that in turn can lead to people choosing to take their own lives. Over 5,400 people in the UK take their lives every year.
But maybe from this tragedy of Robert Enke's suicide, some good will come. The media coverage of this has been sensitive and fair. Messageboards like the BBC's 606, where fans are not afraid to say what they think, has been sympathetic and concerned - it feels like the football community has united in its compassion for one of our own.
Perhaps the most important message has come from those who have said that it should be unacceptable that people feel they have to hide their poor mental health from others, that we as a society should be more supportive of people and bury the stigma once and for all.
For anyone out there who may be suffering in silence, Mind can help, so please get in touch with MindinfoLine on 0845 766 0163.
Paul Farmer, Chief Executive
5 Comments -
4 November 2009
Dogs don't discriminateThere's an amusing and touching column in today's Guardian by Clare Allan, who was nominated for Mind Journalist of the Year 2009, about her dog's blindness to mental health stigma.
Though whether pets can improve mental health is still an object of discussion.
4 Comments -
23 October 2009
Tackling hate crimes is a responsibility for us allThe tragic case of Fiona Pilkington highlights what a mountain we still have to climb to tackle crime, harassment and victimisation against disabled people. Following seven years of abuse at the hands of a local gang, Ms Pilkington set fire to her car while she and her disabled daughter were inside.
At the inquest, the jury found that she killed herself and her daughter due to stress and anxiety about her daughter's future, and the ongoing abuse they were experiencing. The jury foreman said the police's response had an impact on Ms Pilkington's actions, and records show that she had contacted the police on more than 30 occasions, but no one had ever been prosecuted.
In a similar case, one woman recently told Mind of the daily harassment she and her son face, which started when their neighbours found out about her family history of mental distress. Like Fiona Pilkington, she has reported the crimes against her to the police on a number of occasions, but no action has been taken. She and her son continue to live in the shadow of constant abuse, with no expectation of it going away.
To me, the Pilkington case is a clear example of disability hate crime, and many others agree. Courts have a duty to treat these crimes more seriously and increase the sentence for any offence where there is evidence of hostility based on disability.
The Home Secretary, Alan Johnson, is quite right to criticise the "ludicrous" attitude expressed by one police officer at the Pilkington case inquest, that anti-social behaviour is "no longer a police matter". Anti-social behaviour can be a serious threat to all of us and it should not be left to local councils to deal with. The police must take lessons from this about the importance of responding promptly and effectively when people report "low level" incidents.
But in characterising what happened to the Pilkingtons as merely "antisocial behaviour", Alan Johnson implied that these are not serious crimes. And it is not right to place the blame in allowing the harassment to continue solely with the police. Ms Pilkington was known to the police and to social services, but many people also knew of the crimes. In our communities, we all need to take responsibility for the people around us, and be prepared to speak out against crimes and offer support to the victims.
Mind will be sharing good police practice from around the country, to ensure police responses to so-called "low level" incidents improve and everyone is granted their fundamental right to equal access to justice.
But equally, we need to improve community relations, dispel myths about mental health and disability, and challenge the "just ignore the abuse and the perpetrators will get bored" attitudes that still exist, and suggest disabled people should expect to encounter victimisation and deal with it as part of their condition.
Amy Whitelock, Policy and Campaigns Officer
1 Comment -
19 October 2009
Vicious attack on people experiencing mental health problemsLast Thursday's vicious attack on people experiencing mental health problems in the Daily Express has shocked me. In a piece about the new assessment process for benefits claimants, Leo McKinstry disputes whether people receiving welfare benefits for a mental health problem are legitimate.
I don't believe it represents the views of the majority, and regret that any national newspaper should publish inaccuracies of this nature, which are based on prejudice and ignorance.
His figures are incorrect - the Government's statistics relate only to new claimants, rather than all people receiving incapacity benefit.
Even more worrying, is his cynical view of mental health. He says,
"It is telling that more than1.1million incapacity claimants are not suffering from any physical disability at all, but get their handouts by moaning about problems like 'stress' and 'depression'."
Mr McKinstry equates mental distress with malingering and sponging off the state. That's not my experience. My work brings me into frequent contact with people with serious mental health problems who want to work, and who are frustrated by the judgement handed down on them by people like him, that they just need to pull themselves together and stop living the life of Riley.
Of course there are always some people who will play any system for what they can get out of it. But for the vast majority of people with mental health problems, the welfare system is not about free handouts, but about negotiating the support and time they need to get ready for work, and providing a financial safety net where work is not a viable option.
I would be pleased to provide Mr McKinstry with an opportunity to meet people with depression or stress who have lost their jobs and are unable to work, so that he could be better informed about this issue. I only hope he will be willing to take up my offer.
I do agree with him on one thing. Those statistics are telling indeed. What do they tell me? We are not doing enough to prevent mental distress from spiralling out of control, leading to debt, family breakdown, disability and loss of employment. We can do more to inspire hope of recovery.The tried and tested ways of supporting people with mental health problems to return to work are not being used. And we need to challenge the pervasive stigma that denies people with mental health problems the same employment opportunities as anyone else.
Anna Bird, Policy and Campaigns Manager (Social Inclusion and Rights)
16 Comments -
15 October 2009
Get well soon....I've got a cold and am oscillating between coughing loudly in the hope of garnering sympathy, and pretending I'm fine due to the embarrassment at feeling so lousy with something so commonplace.
What then, to make of the recent report from the Royal College of Psychiatrists that half of people in hospital due to mental health problems do not receive any gifts or cards during their time in hospital, compared to a third of people in hospital due to physical health problems? If it is hard to admit to being laid low by the common cold, how much harder to try and explain about a mental health condition?
A British study found that psychiatric patients were significantly less likely than other patients to inform friends and family that they had been admitted to hospital, despite spending a significantly longer period of time in hospital.
The study found that the psychiatric patients received fewer cards and gifts. Further, patients with mental health diagnoses tended to receive toiletries, food and cigarettes as gifts, while other patients receive flowers, balloons, magazines and chocolates.
Another British study confirmed the finding of fewer greeting cards for patients admitted to psychiatric wards. There seems to be a combination of people in hospital due to acute mental distress being unwilling to tell people about their problems, and others not knowing what to say or do when people are admitted to hospital due to a mental health condition, so end up doing nothing. What could people need more during a time when they are on a hospital ward, feeling vulnerable and distressed, but to know that others are thinking of them?
It can be easy and inexpensive to show that you care. Some hospitals, such as the North West Wales Trust allow people to send an email to a patient that will be printed out and handed to the patient. The Royal College of Psychiatry has launched their own get well soon cards that are on sale via their website.
You could also make your own, and getting the family involved in creating or writing in a card could be a good way of having a conversation about why someone is in hospital and what they might be experiencing.
Bridget O'Connell, Head of Information
6 Comments -
30 September 2009
Is this discrimination of the first order?On the second part of Mind's journey to Party Conferences, we landed in Brighton for the Labour Conference. The question on our minds was simple - can Labour achieve a joined up approach for mental health - however everyone else wanted to talk about Andrew Marr's quizzing of Gordon Brown about his health and whether he was taking "pills to help him get through".
Marr put the question to the PM after a number of bloggers had speculated that as Gordon Brown restricts chianti and cheese from his diet he may be taking MAOIs, an outdated category of antidepressant. The PM denied taking any pills and focussed on policy. End of story? Not quite, as the interpretation of the issue raged around the Conference floor.
I was amazed by this. There are almost 36 million prescriptions for antidepressants in the UK, so by definition thousands go about their daily work while on antidepressants.Winston Churchill, voted the "greatest Briton" in a national poll, struggled with his "black dog" of depression for years (for more on this, see the Time to Change campaign's A World Without report). And former Norwegian Prime Minister Kjell Magne Bondevik took a sabbatical to recover from his mental health problem and then went on to win re-election. Why should this be such a big deal?
We still want our politicians to be strong and superhuman. Yet it's a stressful job. We found that 1 in 5 MPs had experience of mental distress, but very few have talked about this openly. There is still stigma on this issue, and this is something the Time to Change campaign is tackling.
Our mission at the conference was to encourage Ministers and their departments to fully engage with the Department of Health's New Horizons consultation, which I urge you to comment on.
At first the signs were not good. Many MPs we spoke to were unaware of New Horizons. But as we discussed this with Ministers in the Department of Work and Pensions, the Ministry of Justice, Department of Communities and Local Government and elsewhere, it became clear that mental health policy already goes way beyond the Department of Health and mental health services. Now there's a chance for the government to follow a more joined up approach, with departments working together to create a clear sense of purpose for putting mental health at the heart of society.
As we head towards an election, we'll carry on pushing for a better chance for all.
Paul Farmer, Chief Executive
4 Comments -
22 September 2009
The Bournemouth effect?The party conference season traditionally kicks off with the Lib Dems, this year in Bournemouth. This is a good conference venue - sea air, pleasant walks and friendly people. Or so we thought....
The Time to Change roadshow was in town talking mental health to conference delegates and members of the public, in the main shopping area just outside Debenhams. Many people the team spoke to were happy to see us. But some just scowled, and a few came up to the stand to tell us why there isn't enough discrimination against people with mental health problems. If ever we needed a reminder why we have to stand up for mental health, and the work still to do, here it was.
Inside the Conference, we had a friendlier welcome. This year, all parties are preparing for a General Election, and our job is to ensure that mental health gets a high profile as manifestos get written. The Lib Dems have a good understanding, and their Shadow Health Secretary is a terrific advocate for mental health. Norman Lamb is also a rock music impresario-he mortgaged his house to invest in his son's music business, and they've now signed up cool grime artist Tinchy Stryder. Norman is now seen as an unlikely equivalent of Simon Cowell and disappeared after our meeting to review Mika's new album.
But there's a catch - there's no money. Even Vince Cable, Britain's most trusted politician and hot favourite for Strictly Come Dancing 2010, warned in his speech that some of the issues he's campaigned for, including mental health, may have to wait for new investment.
So the word of the Conference is reprioritisation. We (and others) will have to make a strong case for the prioritisation of mental health over other issues. So where do we start - Trident, ID cards, other parts of the NHS? Your thoughts are welcome-it's going to be a bumpy ride....
Start the discussion
Paul Farmer, Chief Executive -
6 August 2009
Access to justice is a basic human rightToday, the influential Justice committee has published its report on the CPS. It highlighted current failings of the justice system in providing support for people with mental health problems as victims of crime.
I gave evidence to the Justice Committee in February and debated the issue this morning with Keir Starmer, Director Of Public Prosecutions on the Today programme. He accepted that the CPS had failed people with mental health problems in the past but that the CPS were now addressing this.
For me, access to justice is a basic human right in our society. We all expect that if we are the victim of a crime, we will be taken seriously by the criminal justice system and that we will be supported as a witness. It is extraordinary that so many people find themselves excluded from that system simply because they have had a history of a mental health problem.
The testimonies Mind continues to hear are shocking. A victim of serious physical assault saw his case dropped because he had a diagnosis of schizophrenia, despite identifying the assailants and having physical evidence of the extent of the crime. An out of control vehicle mounted the kerb and ran into a woman walking along the pavement, but the case of dangerous driving was dropped because the pedestrian had attempted suicide in the past, and it was suggested she may have put herself in the way of danger intentionally. A mother and her teenage son have endured years of abuse at the hands of their neighbours after disclosing family history of mental illness, and continue to live in fear because the police will not take the case seriously.
But the tide is now turning. The Justice Committee and the DPP himself accept that it can't go on like this. The CPS policy, newly released this week with input from Mind, is welcome. But now we need to see a culture change from top to bottom. A change in attitudes, towards a system that treats someone with a mental health problem as an equal citizen with equal access to justice.
Our work in tackling stigma and discrimination at all levels, through Time to Change and many other activities within Mind, is crucial. But we won't make any difference unless others act. Here's a great opportunity for the DPP and the CPS to lead the way and help transform the experience of people with mental health problems.
Paul Farmer, Chief Executive, Mind
Start the discussion