Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-7qhmt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T21:34:05.150Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Specialist registrars' views on the proposed reform of the Mental Health Act (1983)

Potential impact on recruitment and retention of consultant psychiatrists

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Maya Spencer
Affiliation:
Somerset Partnership NHS and Social CareTrust, Rydon House, Cheddon Road, Taunton, Somerset TA27AZ
Alain Gregoire
Affiliation:
West Hampshire NHS Trust, Maplos Building, Tatchbury Mount Hospital
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

AIMS AND METHOD

A postal questionnaire was sent to specialist registrars (SpRs) in the Wessex Region to evaluate senior trainees' reactions to information about the proposed changes in mental health legislation and to ascertain if the information had adversely affected their view of their future careers as consultants.

RESULTS

A high level of concern about the proposed changes and their potential impact on consultants was revealed. A majority of SpRs took a more negative view of their future career, especially those preparing a single Certificate of Completion of Specialist Training in general adult psychiatry, who were more likely to have adverse perceptions and to have thought of opting out.

SERVICE IMPLICATIONS

The legislative proposals have the potential for considerable impact on recruitment and retention of psychiatrists.

Type
Original Papers
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © 2002. The Royal College of Psychiatrists

Examination of current mental health policy reveals two divergent trends: on the one hand, a drive towards quality improvement, transparency and accountability through clinical governance, with an emphasis on patients' and carers' rights, expectations and involvement in care planning and service evaluation; and on the other, an increasingly paternalistic trend towards central Government control, with an expansion of custodial care at the expense of personal and clinical freedom. At the same time that home treatment is being advocated to spare patients the unpleasantness of in-patient admission, the realities of resource allocation show that finances are being poured into the forensic services ahead of all else. Public protection is seen as the principal motivation behind the proposed legislation to reform the Mental Health Act (Reference ZigmondZigmond, 2001), now enshrined in the White Paper Reforming the Mental Health Act (Department of Health, 2000), with the pendulum swinging so far from the individual's freedom that there are concerns as to whether it will breach the Human Rights Act (Reference LeungLeung, 2001).

Concern about the proposed legislation is widespread. Campbell (Reference Campbell2001) cites complaints from a number of local service user organisations that ‘the viability of their work is being undermined by an atmosphere favouring custodial approaches’.

The College has responded to the Government's proposals in depth, with considerable concern about fundamental aspects such as the broadened definition of mental disorder, the detrimental effect of a coercive service on patients' willingness to seek help and the role of the new tribunals (Reference ZigmondZigmond, 2001).

In a letter to the BMJ, Crawford et al (Reference Crawford, Hopkins and Thomas2001) reported a survey of all consultant psychiatrists in England and Wales, which focused on the plans for preventative detention of people with severe personality disorder. Only 20% of the 44% who responded supported the proposed legislation.

In the context of the current recruitment crisis in psychiatry, the prospect of an increasingly custodial role for consultant psychiatrists may have a detrimental impact on attracting doctors into the specialty, or discourage trainees from choosing a career in general adult psychiatry. The views of trainees in psychiatry are, therefore, of critical importance, not only to the future implementation of a new Act but also to the viability of future plans for the development and modernisation of mental health services in the UK.

Method

Within a week of a well-attended professorial lecture summarising the proposed legislative changes, a postal questionnaire was sent to all 33 specialist registrars (SpRs) on the Wessex Higher Training Scheme preparing a Certificate of Completion of Specialist Training (CCST) in general adult or old age psychiatry. Respondents were asked to agree or disagree with 10 items identified as potential areas of concern regarding the legislative proposals. Views on how consultants will be affected by the proposed legislation and altered perceptions of their own future career in the light of the Government's plans were investigated in 11 further questions. Space was given for free comment.

Results

Of 33 questionnaires sent out, 28 were returned, with 26 completed, giving a viable response rate of 79%. (One person felt (s)he had insufficient knowledge to answer the questionnaire and one was returned blank.)

Trainees' characteristics

Twelve trainees (46%) were preparing a single CCST in general adult psychiatry, 5 (19%) a single CCST in old age and 8 (31%) a dual CCST, 6 with old age, 1 with psychotherapy and 1 with forensic. One person did not identify his/her CCST.

Sources of information about the White Paper were identified as follows: 18 (69%) attended the professorial lecture, 10 (38%) of these had no other teaching; 12 (46%) had had other teaching, 4 (15%) of whom did not attend the professorial lecture. Only 4 (15%) had had no teaching, but all of these had done some reading on the issue. In all, 18 (69%) had done some reading. Of these, 7 (27%) mentioned the Department of Health website and another 7 (27%) the British Journal of Psychiatry.

Concerns about proposed changes

Trainees' responses to a 10-item list of potential concerns regarding the proposed legislative changes are presented in Table 1.

Table 1. Trainees' concerns about the content of the White Paper (n=26)

Question Answered yes (%) Answered no (%) Did not answer (%)
Do you think there are major flaws in the proposed legislation that suggest it needs redrafting in important areas? 23 (89) 3 (11)
Are you concerned about any of the following:
adequacy of medical work force resources to meet the demands of the new legislation 26 (100)
loss of exclusion criteria (e.g. substance misuse) 22 (85) 3 (11) 1 (4)
loss of treatability criterion? 22 (85) 3 (11) 1 (4)
extension of approved social worker role to other professionals 11 (42) 14 (54) 1 (4)
potential loss of approved social worker involvement 19 (73) 6 (23) 1 (4)
introduction of behaviour management as a reason to detain 20 (77) 5 (19) 1 (4)
inclusion of clinical psychologists as clinical supervisor 8 (31) 17 (65) 1 (4)
introduction of community treatment option 5 (19) 20 (77) 1 (4)
practicality of community treatment powers 21 (81) 4 (15) 1 (4)

Perceptions of how consultants will be affected by the proposed legislation

Trainees' responses are given in Table 2. Of the 18 (69%) whose overall impression of the legislation was unfavourable, 7 had a full house of negative answers to all the itemised concerns and 4 gave only one positive answer; that is, of those who had an unfavourable impression, 11 (42% of all respondents) had an extremely unfavourable impression. Of these, 7 (64%) were preparing a single CCST in general adult psychiatry.

Table 2. Trainees' perceptions of the impact of the proposals on consultants' daily work (n=26)

Question Agreed (%) Disagreed (%) Did not answer (%)
Imagining its effect on your future working life as a consultant, is your view of the proposed legislation:
favourable 13 (50) 12 (46) 1 (4)
unfavourable 18 (69) 3 (12) 5 (19)
Do you think it will be:
a big improvement 0 (0) 25 (96) 1 (4)
burdensome 21 (81) 1 (4) 4 (15)
helpful 0 (0) 22 (85) 4 (15)
adding to stress 20 (77) 1 (4)
reducing stress 5 (19)
adding to workload 23 (88) 1 (4)
reducing workload 2 (8)
Do you think the proposed legislation will adversely affect your:
clinical freedom 17 (65) 8 (31) 1 (4)
morale 15 (58) 11 (42) 0 (0)
time spent on paperwork 23 (88) 3 (12) 0 (0)
relationships with patients 12 (46) 13 (50) 1 (4)

Effects of proposals on views of their future careers

After learning of the proposed legislation, 16 (62%) had a more negative perception of their future career. For this subgroup of 16, further details of the negative impact of the proposed legislation are given in Table 3.

Table 3. Responses from those with negative perceptions of future career (n=16)

Agreed (%) Disagreed (%) Did not answer (%)
Has the proposed legislation caused you to:
view general adult psychiatry less favourably than before 16 (100)
perceive private practice more favourably 7 (44) 9 (56)
think of giving up NHS psychiatry 8 (50) 7 (44) 1 (6)
want to change your specialist registrar training plans 3 (19) 12 (75) 1 (6)

Of the 7 (44% of the subgroup) who viewed private practice more favourably, 6 (86%) were preparing a single CCST in general adult psychiatry, as were 6 of the 8 (50% of the subgroup) who had thought about giving up NHS psychiatry. Analysis of all respondents shows that 6 out of the 12 trainees (50%) preparing a single CCST in general adult psychiatry viewed private practice more favourably in the context of the proposed legislation and an overlapping 6 (50%) had thought about giving up NHS psychiatry. Four of these trainees agreed with both items, in contrast to only one who was not preparing a single CCST in general adult psychiatry. They represent 15.4% of the total study sample.

In addition to 3 (18.8%) who had considered changing their SpR plans, a further 3 (18.8%) spontaneously mentioned they were less concerned because they were preparing dual accreditation.

Discussion

This survey attracted a good response rate, but the sample size is small. The majority of respondents held an unfavourable view of the proposals. The results accord with the general concern within the profession about the

White Paper, although there is very little published statistical evidence with which to make detailed comparison. However, the level of concern (one-quarter of respondents) about the introduction of compulsory treatment in the community is much lower than the two-thirds majority who rejected it outright at a recent debate on the subject in February 2000 (Reference Pinfold and BindmanPinfold & Bindman, 2001).

The areas of highest concern deal with the practicalities of implementing the proposals, especially adequacy of resources and the burden of extra work. Ethical considerations involved in the changed definition of mental disorder and the treatability issue, which lie at the heart of the legislative framework that underpins psychiatric practice, also proved to be major concerns. No respondent thought the new legislation would be helpful or an improvement.

A substantial minority of SpRs were sufficiently adversely affected by the implications of the proposed legislation to consider career alternatives. Trainees planning a career in general adult psychiatry were more likely to give negative responses and to have considered opting out.

Conclusion

The proposals in the White Paper were viewed negatively by the majority of future consultant psychiatrists in this sample, with particular concern expressed about the practicalities of implementation and ethical considerations. The results indicate a potential negative impact of the legislation on the recruitment and retention of senior medical staff, especially in general adult psychiatry. This could, in turn, add to the significant adverse effect of the current workforce shortage on the development and delivery of services.

Declaration of interest

None.

References

Campbell, P. (2001) The role of user of psychiatric services in service development – influence not power. Psychiatric Bulletin, 25, 8788.Google Scholar
Crawford, M. J., Hopkins, W., Thomas, P., et al (2001) Most psychiatrists oppose plans for new Mental Health Act. BMJ, 322, 866.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Department of Health (2000) Reforming the Mental Health Act. London: Stationery Office.Google Scholar
Leung, W. C. (2001) The new Mental Health Act: a guide for clinicians. Hospital Medicine, 62, 347350.Google Scholar
Pinfold, V. & Bindman, J. (2001) Is compulsory community treatment ever justified? Psychiatric Bulletin, 25, 268270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zigmond, A. S. (2001) Reform of the Mental Health Act 1983: the Green Paper. Psychiatric Bulletin, 25, 126128.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1. Trainees' concerns about the content of the White Paper (n=26)

Figure 1

Table 2. Trainees' perceptions of the impact of the proposals on consultants' daily work (n=26)

Figure 2

Table 3. Responses from those with negative perceptions of future career (n=16)

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.