Children wait a decade for mental health support, report finds
BMJ 2016; 353 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i3199 (Published 08 June 2016) Cite this as: BMJ 2016;353:i3199
All rapid responses
Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed. Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles. The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not including references and author details. We will no longer post responses that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
The report by The Centre For Mental Health unfortunately contains nothing new. So why state that 'the report finds' the information contained in it. The people who work in the organisation have admirable experience but the money spent on yet more reports needs to be channelled into providing actual services. Constantly rehearsing the findings is a waste of funds. Simply googling the Centre will bring up pages of well meaning reports going back decades.
If any more reports are undertaken let one include an audit of how much they cost to draw up and how much they have made a difference. Let them include how much is spent on conferences and events and projects and training for failed projects and research into yet more 'innovative' projects and yet more theories and courses ........
References; The Centre for Mental Health, full report published online, Rethink Mental Illness
My own experience of working as a social services inspector of children services a decade ago and feedback from those still working in social services and clinical psychology where the gap between theory and findings from research and reports and actual practice, in many places, is farcical.
Competing interests: No competing interests
Something is rotten in the state of CAMHS [child and adolescent mental health services]
An audit of primary health care professionals in the area where I worked as a consultant paediatrician for 20 years as to why they referred children with a range of mental health problems to community paediatricians rather than to CAMHS [child and adolescent mental health services] showed that 100% of respondents were frustrated by the lack of responsiveness and evasiveness of CAMHS to referrals [Essex C, unpublished data]. Comments included "If CAMHS put as much effort in to seeing children as they do in deflecting referrals, children might get seen".
My experience is that CAMHS are poorly managed, have poor governance and little accountability. The long waiting lists for children to be seen in CAMHS are because of weak management which does not tackle the behaviour of many CAMHS practitioners. There is no accountability about the tiny case loads of many CAMHS staff, with children receiving repetitive ongoing appointments in some cases, and refusal to accept referrals in many other cases. Despite funding new posts in CAMHS [contrary to the CAMHS mantra that they receive little funding] the staff were not challenged about their professional practices. Providing more staff to behave in the same way would not solve the problem of CAMHS waiting lists.
Competing interests: No competing interests