The next issue of Clinical Psychology Forum is a special issue featuring a 
lead article about the Doncaster pilot. Graham Turpin invited various people 
to respond to the main article. The Midlands Psychology Group responded with 
two articles, one which will appear alongside the Doncaster pilot article 
and one which will appear probably in the next issue. I can attach the 
articles to this list when they appear. There seems to be a steady trickle 
of people questioning Layard and the Increasing Access to Psychological 
Therapies experiment, but I think it is unlikely that this will lead to any 
great waves in the short term, but maybe I'm just too pessimistic.
Penny
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Mark Burton" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 11:34 AM
Subject: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] This Month's 'The Psychologist' - Layard and 
state security


This email covers 2 things - the Layard CBT issue, and the
torture/interrogation issue.

1)  Layard
List members might like to comment on the first news item in this month's
'Psychologist' magazine (the BPS monthly).
http://www.bps.org.uk/publications/thepsychologist/extras/pages$/2007/more-funds-for-mental-health.cfm
It mention's the new money and the emphasis on CBT.  It interviews Graham
Turpin (one of the BPS experts on the Improving Access to Psych therapies
reference group).  Turpin's main concern seems to be the usual craft union
interest that, to quote - 'These new CBT therapists shouldn't threaten job
prospects for psychologists'.  He also gives a response to suggestion that
this initiative is motivated by getting people back to work (there is no
mention that the argument is actually that this isn't a problem, the
problem is the idea of cutting benefits for those who are chroniclly
sick).
Although our press release http://www.compsy.org.uk/changing%20minds.pdf
was sent to The Psychologist there is no mention of our critique of the
whole approach.
There is, however this letterfrom James Japp, Dunblane and list members
might like to use this as a hook for a response:-

Layard's folly
Lord Layard is obviously a capable and well-meaning individual but does
any psychologist, regardless of discipline, really believe that an average
of 10 sessions of CBT is sufficient input as a strategy for returning
those with a mental health condition on long-term incapacity benefit back
into work? Lord Layard puts forward well-argued and perfectly valid points
for CBT as a health solution to alleviate anxiety and depression in the
sizable population who unfortunately suffer from a mental health
condition. However, he then skips to CBT as a solution to long-term
intransigent unemployment without any supporting evidence or logical
rationale for the therapy itself. Counselling (CBT or any other form) can
be excellent as an early intervention, particularly for job retention but
what it is not is 'evidence-based practice' for long-term intransigent
unemployment.Individuals fail to progress from incapacity benefit to
employment for a whole host of practical reasons that cannot be moderated
by counselling including: poor literacy skills, a low general skill base,
contentedness with current position in life, low stamina levels, lack of
opportunity, employer prejudice, a second disability, cultural attitude,
being less well off working than on incapacity benefit, and inability to
identify job sources to mention a few. Furthermore, a number of
psychosocial issues not necessarily related to the mental health condition
including: low confidence, poor social skills, socialised low
expectations, or fear of failing may also need addressed.The long-term
unemployed require holistic intervention with active support on a number
of fronts and which is sustained long after employment has commenced. The
actual mental health condition comes fairly low in the list of priorities;
there are plenty of examples of individuals with chronic mental health
problems holding down employment. CBT is not the solution to reducing the
numbers on incapacity benefit, but holistic and supportive intervention
that identifies and addresses all the needs of the individual can be, and
if the patient buys into it, this may well include CBT.
James Japp
Dunblane


2) Psychologists and State security / torture / interrogation

You can also see our letter on torture on the same page (723)

Here it is for those who aren't members and therefore can't access -

Psychologists and national security

Karen Carr from the Defence Academy of the UK (Letters, October 2007)
perhaps not surprisingly contends that 'psychology should be used in a
controlled way to help with our very difficult security and defence
problems'. But as the events we outline show, the control will not be by
democratic institutions, nor by professional bodies, but by the
institutions of state security themselves. Involvement in them implies the
kind of Faustian pact in which the leadership of the APA has now been
exposed. In that case it was the professional body itself that was
corrupted, but the same pressures and processes will operate
elsewhere.That is why psychologists should not be present in the military
and in secret prisons - presence in these organisations legitimates their
existence and they stand no chance of ameliorating their regimes. Of
course, we do not know if psychologists are working in the secret services
(we have to assume they are), but their practice there is not subject to
the kind of democratic scrutiny that Karen calls for. Thus it lacks
safeguards, the accountability being to unfettered State interests and not
to the public interest that, however muted, is still present in, for
example, the prison service and other criminal justice settings. Because
our democracy is so conditional and flawed it cannot serve as the
safeguard that substitutes for a self-imposed ethical practice, including
refusal to engage in the undemocratic structures of institutional
oppression that are the more secretive parts of the State's apparatus.
Mark Burton
Carolyn Kagan
Manchester Metropolitan University

Mark Burton

___________________________________
COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK.
To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on 
[log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask] 

___________________________________
COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK.
To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask]