Skip to main content Accessibility help

Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm

  • Pat Bracken (a1), Philip Thomas (a2), Sami Timimi (a3), Eia Asen (a4), Graham Behr (a5), Carl Beuster (a6), Seth Bhunnoo (a7), Ivor Browne (a8), Navjyoat Chhina (a9), Duncan Double (a10), Simon Downer (a11), Chris Evans (a12), Suman Fernando (a13), Malcolm R. Garland (a14), William Hopkins (a15), Rhodri Huws (a16), Bob Johnson (a17), Brian Martindale (a18), Hugh Middleton (a19), Daniel Moldavsky (a20), Joanna Moncrieff (a21), Simon Mullins (a22), Julia Nelki (a23), Matteo Pizzo (a24), James Rodger (a25), Marcellino Smyth (a26), Derek Summerfield (a27), Jeremy Wallace (a28) and David Yeomans (a29)...


A series of editorials in this Journal have argued that psychiatry is in the midst of a crisis. The various solutions proposed would all involve a strengthening of psychiatry's identity as essentially ‘applied neuroscience’. Although not discounting the importance of the brain sciences and psychopharmacology, we argue that psychiatry needs to move beyond the dominance of the current, technological paradigm. This would be more in keeping with the evidence about how positive outcomes are achieved and could also serve to foster more meaningful collaboration with the growing service user movement.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the or variations. ‘’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm
      Available formats

      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm
      Available formats

      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm
      Available formats


Corresponding author

Pat Bracken, MD, MRCPsych, PhD, Centre for Mental Health Care and Recovery, Bantry General Hospital, Bantry, Co Cork, Ireland. Email:


Hide All

See editorial, pp. 421-422, this issue.

Declaration of interest




Hide All
1 Radden, J. Thinking about the repair manual: technique and technology in psychiatry. In Philosophical Perspectives on Technology and Psychiatry (ed Philips, J): 263–77. Oxford University Press, 2008.
2 Craddock, N, Antebi, D, Attenburrow, M-J, Bailey, A, Carson, A, Cowen, P, et al. Wake-up call for British psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 2008; 193: 69.
3 Bullmore, E, Fletcher, P, Jones, PB. Why psychiatry can't afford to be neurophobic. Br J Psychiatry 2009; 194: 293–5.
4 Oyebode, F, Humphreys, M. The future of psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 439–40.
5 Insel, TR, Quiron, R. Psychiatry as a clinical neuroscience discipline. JAMA 2005; 294: 2221–4.
6 Kingdon, D, Young, AH. Research into putative biological mechanisms of mental disorders has been of no value to clinical psychiatry. Br J Psychiatry 2007; 191: 285–90.
7 Rose, S. The need for a critical neuroscience: from neuroideology to neurotechnology. In Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience (eds Choudhury, S, Slaby, J): 5366. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
8 Vul, E, Harris, C, Winkelmann, P, Pashler, H. Puzzlingly high correlations in fMRI studies of emotion, personality, and social cognition. Perspect Psychol Sci 2009; 4: 319–24.
9 Angermeyer, MC, Holzinger, A, Carta, MG, Schomerus, G. Biogenetic explanations and public acceptance of mental illness: systematic review of population studies. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 367–72.
10 Slade, M. Personal Recovery and Mental Illness. Cambridge University Press, 2009.
11 Gronfein, W. Psychotropic drugs and the origins of deinstitutionalization. Soc Probl 32: 437–54.
12 Aviram, U, Syme, Sl, Cohen, JB. The effects of policies and programs on reduction of mental hospitalization. Soc Sci Med 1976; 10: 571–7.
13 Porter, R. A Social History of Madness: Stories of the Insane. Weidenfeld and Nicolson, 1987.
14 Harré, R, Gillett, G. The Discursive Mind. Sage, 1994.
15 Ingleby, D. Critical Psychiatry: The Politics of Mental Health. Penguin, 1980.
16 Angell, M. The illusions of psychiatry. New York Rev Books 2011, 14 July (
17 Angell, M. The epidemic of mental illness: why? New York Rev Books 2011, 23 June (
18 Frances, A. The first draft of DSM-V: if accepted, will fan the flames of false positive diagnoses. BMJ 2010; 340: c1168.
19 Carey, B, Harris, G. Psychiatric group faces scrutiny over drug industry ties. New York Times 2008; 12 July (
20 Andrews, G. Placebo response in depression: bane of research, boon to therapy. Br J Psychiatry 2001; 178: 192–4.
21 Kirsch, I, Sapirstein, G. Listening to prozac but hearing placebo: a metaanalysis of antidepressant medication 1998. Prev Treat 1998; 1: 0002a.
22 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) (2009). Depression: The Treatment and Management of Depression in Adults. NICE Clinical Guideline CG90. London: NICE (
23 Fournier, JC, DeRubeis, RJ, Hollon, SD, Dimidjian, S, Amsterdam, JD, Shelton, RC, et al. Antidepressant drug effects and depression severity: a patient-level meta-analysis. JAMA 2010; 303: 4753.
24 Kirsch, I, Deacon, BJ, Huedo-Medina, TB, Scoboria, A, Moore, TJ, Johnson, BT. Initial severity and antidepressant benefits: a meta-analysis of data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. PLoS Med 2008; 5: e45.
25 Thompson, JJ, Ritenbaugh, C, Nichter, M. Reconsidering the placebo response from a broad anthropological perspective. Cult Med Psychiatry 2009; 33: 112–52.
26 McQueen, D, St John Smith, P. Placebo effects: a new paradigm and relevance to psychiatry. Int Psychiatry 2012; 9: 13.
27 Moerman, D. Meaning, Medicine and the ‘Placebo Effect’. Cambridge University Press, 2002.
28 Moncrieff, J. The Myth of the Chemical Cure: A Critique of Psychiatric Drug Treatment. Palgrave Macmillan, 2008
29 Rasmussen, K. Sham electroconvulsive therapy studies in depressive illness: a review of the literature and consideration of the placebo phenomenon in electroconvulsive therapy practice. J ECT 2009; 25: 54–9.
30 Read, J, Bentall, R. The effectiveness of electroconvulsive therapy: a literature review. Epidemiol Psichiatr Soc 2010; 19: 333–47.
31 Johnstone, EC, Deakin, JFW, Lawler, P, Frith, CD, Stevens, M, McPherson, K. The Northwick Park electroconvulsive therapy trial. Lancet 1980; 2: 1317–20.
32 Kendell, R. The present state of electroconvulsive therapy. Br J Psychiatry 1981; 139: 265–83.
33 Beck, AT. Cognitive therapy: past, present, and future. J Consult Clin Psychol 1993;61: 194–8.
34 Jacobson, NS, Dobson, KS, Truax, PA, Addis, M, Koerner, K, Gollan, JK, et al. A component analysis of cognitive-behavioural treatment for depression. J Consult Clin Psychol 1996; 64: 295304.
35 Longmore, RJ, Worrell, M. Do we need to challenge thoughts in cognitive behaviour therapy? Clin Psychol Rev 2007; 27: 173–87.
36 Budd, R, Hughes, I. The dodo bird verdict - controversial, inevitable and important: a commentary on 30 years of meta-analyses. Clin Psychol Psychother 2009; 16: 510–22.
37 Cooper, M. Essential Research Findings in Counselling and Psychotherapy: The Facts are Friendly. Sage, 2008.
38 Castonguay, LG, Beutler, LE. Common and unique principles of therapeutic change: what do we know and what do we need to know? In Principles of Therapeutic Change that Work (eds Castonguay, LG, Beutler, LE): 353–69. Oxford University Press, 2006.
39 Stiles, WB, Barkham, M, Mellor-Car, J. Effectiveness of cognitive-behavioural, person-centred, and psychodynamic therapies in UK primary-care routine practice: replication in a larger sample. Psychol Med 2008; 38: 677–88.
40 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (2009) Quick Reference Guide. Depression: Treatment and Management of Depression in Adults, including Adults with a Chronic Physical Health Problem. London: NICE (
41 Davidson, L. Living Outside Mental Illness: Qualitative Studies of Recovery in Schizophrenia. New York University Press, 2003.
42 Frank, AF, Gunderson, JG. The role of the therapeutic alliance in the treatment of schizophrenia. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1990; 47: 228–36.
43 Harrow, M, Jobe, TH. Factors involved in outcome and recovery in schizophrenia patients not on antipsychotic medications: a 15-year multifollow-up study. J Nerv Ment Dis 2007; 195: 406–14.
44 Mancini, MA, Hardiman, ER, Lawson, HA. Making sense of it all: consumer providers' theories about factors facilitating and impeding recovery from psychiatric disabilities. Psychiatr Rehabil J 2005; 29: 4855.
45 Tew, J, Ramon, S, Slade, M, Bird, V, Melton, J, Le Boutillier, C. Social factors and recovery from mental health difficulties: a review of the evidence. Br J Soc Work 2012; 42: 443–60.
46 Leamy, M, Bird, V, Le Boutillier, C, Williams, J, Slade, M. Conceptual framework for personal recovery in mental health: systematic review and narrative synthesis. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 445–52.
47 Raguram, R, Venkateswaran, A, Ramakrishna, J, Weiss, MG. Traditional community resources for mental health: a report of temple healing from India. BMJ 2002; 325: 3840.
48 Seebohm, P, Henderson, P, Munn-Giddings, C, Thomas, P, Yasmeen, S. Together We Will Change: Community Development, Mental Health and Diversity. Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, 2005.
49 Halliburton, M. Finding a fit: psychiatric pluralism in South India and its implications for WHO studies of mental disorder. Transcult Psychiatry 2004; 41: 8098.
50 Warner, R. How much of the burden of schizophrenia is alleviated by treatment? Br J Psychiatry 2003; 183: 375–6.
51 Lepping, P, Sambhi, RS, Whittington, R, Lane, S, Poole, R. Clinical relevance of findings in trials of antipsychotics: systematic review. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 198: 341–5.
52 Bola, JR, Kao, DT, Soydan, H. Antipsychotic medication for early-episode schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 2012; 38: 23–5.
53 Tyrer, P, Kendall, T. The spurious advance of antipsychotic drug therapy. Lancet 2009; 373: 45.
54 Kendall, T. The rise and fall of the atypical antipsychotics. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 266–8.
55 Foley, DL, Morley, KI. Systematic review of early cardiometabolic outcomes of the first treated episode of psychosis. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011; 68: 609–16.
56 Thornicroft, G. Physical health disparities and mental illness: the scandal of premature mortality. Br J Psychiatry 2011; 199: 441–2.
57 Kirmayer, LJ, Gold, I. Re-socializing psychiatry: critical neuroscience and the limits of reductionism. In Critical Neuroscience: A Handbook of the Social and Cultural Contexts of Neuroscience (eds Choudhury, S, Slaby, J): 307–30. Wiley-Blackwell, 2012.
58 Warner, R. Does the scientific evidence support the recovery model? Psychiatrist 2010; 34: 35.
59 Campbell, P. The service user/survivor movement. In Mental Health Still Matters (eds Reynolds, J, Muston, R, Heller, T, Leach, J, McCormick, M, Wallcraft, J and Walsh, M): 4652. Open University/Palgrave Macmillan, 2009.
60 Wallcraft, J, Read, J, Sweeney, A. On Our Own Terms: Users and Survivors of Mental Health Services Working Together for Support and Change. Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health, 2003.
61 MindFreedom, . Global Campaign News. MindFreedom, no date (
62 Romme, M, Escher, S. Accepting Voices. MIND, 1993.
63 Stastny, P, Lehmann, P. Alternatives Beyond Psychiatry. Peter Lehmann Publishing, 2007.
64 Rogers, A, Pilgrim, D, Lacey, R. Experiencing Psychiatry: Users' Views of Services. MacMillan, 1993.
65 Roberts, G, Wolfson, P. The rediscovery of recovery: open to all. Adv Psychiatr Treat 2004; 10: 3748.
66 Kleinman, A, van der Geest, S. ‘Care’ in health care. Remaking the moral world of medicine. Med Anthropol 2009; 21: 159–68.
67 Heath, I. Divided we fall. The 2011 Harveian oration delivered to the Royal College of Physicians on October 18th 2011. Clin Med 2011; 11: 576–86.

Related content

Powered by UNSILO

Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm

  • Pat Bracken (a1), Philip Thomas (a2), Sami Timimi (a3), Eia Asen (a4), Graham Behr (a5), Carl Beuster (a6), Seth Bhunnoo (a7), Ivor Browne (a8), Navjyoat Chhina (a9), Duncan Double (a10), Simon Downer (a11), Chris Evans (a12), Suman Fernando (a13), Malcolm R. Garland (a14), William Hopkins (a15), Rhodri Huws (a16), Bob Johnson (a17), Brian Martindale (a18), Hugh Middleton (a19), Daniel Moldavsky (a20), Joanna Moncrieff (a21), Simon Mullins (a22), Julia Nelki (a23), Matteo Pizzo (a24), James Rodger (a25), Marcellino Smyth (a26), Derek Summerfield (a27), Jeremy Wallace (a28) and David Yeomans (a29)...


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.

Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm

  • Pat Bracken (a1), Philip Thomas (a2), Sami Timimi (a3), Eia Asen (a4), Graham Behr (a5), Carl Beuster (a6), Seth Bhunnoo (a7), Ivor Browne (a8), Navjyoat Chhina (a9), Duncan Double (a10), Simon Downer (a11), Chris Evans (a12), Suman Fernando (a13), Malcolm R. Garland (a14), William Hopkins (a15), Rhodri Huws (a16), Bob Johnson (a17), Brian Martindale (a18), Hugh Middleton (a19), Daniel Moldavsky (a20), Joanna Moncrieff (a21), Simon Mullins (a22), Julia Nelki (a23), Matteo Pizzo (a24), James Rodger (a25), Marcellino Smyth (a26), Derek Summerfield (a27), Jeremy Wallace (a28) and David Yeomans (a29)...
Submit a response


Evolutionary psychiatry could be the new paradigm

David Geaney, Formerly Consultant Psychiatrist and Honorary Senior Clinical Lecturer
01 February 2013

The answer to Bracken et al's (1) critical evaluation of contemporarypsychiatry needs to go beyond Holmes' suggestion (2) of an increased focuson developmental psychopathology, important though that is. Fundamental questions remain - "what is the the normal function of the brain/mind?", and "how can you distinguish normal functioning under stress from abnormalfunction?".

The environmental conditions in which we evolved, and to which we areadapted, are very different to those that we face today and so a further worrying question is "are we treating people whose brains/minds are functioning normally in response to stress, whilst overlooking the source of their stress?". Evolutionary psychiatry is clear that dysphoric symptoms are an evolved adaptive response to adversity (3) and the placeboresponse makes sense in this context, as an evolved response to psychosocial support at times of adversity.

An evolutionary perspective recognises the importance not only of ourgenetic heritage but also of our evolved neuroplasticity in response to our social and cultural environment, and so naturally embraces the biological and social sciences (4).

The current debate about psychiatry's future direction has a strikingparallel with the evolution of our asymmetric cerebral hemispheres and their differentiated function. The right hemisphere takes an holistic, global perspective through an active interaction with the environment whereas the left hemisphere takes a detached, analytical view of a specific aspect of the environment, before returning the information to the right hemisphere for reintegration with the whole (5). If the left hemisphere becomes unduly dominant, it fails to recognise the importance of the right hemisphere's global perspective and functions instead in an increasingly detailed but disconnected way.

It is crucial that we reintegrate the functioning of psychiatry's twocerebral hemispheres in a complementary way and it seems to me that evolutionary psychiatry provides the urgently needed paradigm to reconcilemultiple perspectives in a respectful, unifying manner.

Certainly evolutionary psychiatry is in its infancy and will need to develop with care, but in its absence it seems inevitable that our profession will continue to suffer from fundamental divisions and will fail to develop a corpus of broadly accepted knowledge and practice. The time is right for psychiatry to make a decisive move.

1. Bracken P, Thomas P, Timimi S et al. Psychiatry beyond the currentparadigm. Br J Psychiatry 2012;201:430-42. Holmes JA. New paradigm: developmental psychopathology. Br J Psychiatry2012; Nesse RM. Evolutionary explanations of emotions. Human Nature 1990;1:261-894. Nettle D. Beyond nature versus culture: cultural variation as an evolved characteristic. J Royal Anthropological Institute 2009;15:223-405. McGilchrist I. The Master and his Emissary: the divided brain and the making of the Western world. Yale University Press, 2009

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

Brain Mind Interface

Mario F. Juruena, Professor Doctor/Honorary Senior Lecturer
09 January 2013

Dear Editor

I commend Bracken and colleagues for their interesting and timely article Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm. The authors highlight an important issue: "Psychiatry is not neurology; it is not a medicine of thebrain. Although mental health problems undoubtedly have a biological dimension..."The presence of merely a few number of well-validated biomarkers and the early stage in which our understanding of neurobiology and genetics finds itself have obstructed the integration of neuroscience into psychiatric diagnosis to date (1).Integrative approaches to understanding complex mental health issues can transcend disciplinary and knowledge boundaries and provide opportunities to view phenomena from diverse perspectives. The potential of an integrative approach to contribute to improvements in human health and well-being are more important than historical biases (2). This approach states that the causes, development and outcomes of disorders are determined by the relationship of psychological, social and cultural factors with biochemistry and physiology. Biochemistry and physiology are not disconnected and different from the rest of our experiences and life events. This system is based on current studies that reported that the brain and its cognitive processes show a fantastic synchronisation. Consequently, accepting the brain-body-mind complex is possible only when the three systems - nervous, endocrine and immune - can receive information from each of the other systems (3). The fourth system, the mind (our thoughts, our feelings, our beliefs and our hopes), is part of the functioning of the brain integrating the paradigm. The interaction of the mind, an explicit functioning of the brain, with other body systems iscritical for the maintenance of homeostasis and well-being (4). The relationship between stress and illness is a strong example that can be more fully understood from an integrative perspective. It is now broadly accepted that psychological stress may change the internal homeostatical state of an individual. Whenever there is an acute interruption of this balance, illness may result. The social and physical environments have an enormous impact on our physiology and behaviour, and they influence the process of adaptation. It is correct to state that at the same time that our experiences change our brain and thoughts, namely, changing our mind, we are changing our neurobiology Genes, early life stress, adult experiences, life style, and stressful life experiences all add to the way the body adapts to a changing environment; and all these factors help to determine the cost to the body or the "allostatic load" (5). Of special interest are the psychological stress (stress in the mind)and the interactions of the nervous, endocrine and immune systems. The lack of correlations between clinical and biological data continues to be,according to several authors, one of the great unsolved problems of psychiatry today and could be solved by recovering the value of traditional psychopathological analysis based on fundamental and thorough clinical assessment, which should support aetiological research and treatment decisions. Therefore, only the adoption of a multidisciplinary approach that will bring together the knowledge and the technology of physics, physiology, psychology and philosophy, we can integrate the whole system, but they areimperfect without the contribution from other fields such as cultural anthropology, economics, epidemiology, political science, and sociology.Yours sincerely,

Prof. Dr. Mario F. Juruena

References:1.Hyman SE. Can neuroscience be integrated into the DSM-V? Nat Rev Neurosci 2007;8:725-732. 2.King SL, Hegadoren KM. An integrative science approach: value added in stress research. Nurs Health Sci. 2006;8(2):114-9. 3.Basar E, Karakas S. Neuroscience is awaiting for a breakthrough: an essay bridging the concepts of Descartes, Einstein, Heisenberg, Hebb and Hayek with the explanatory formulations in this special issue. Int J Psychophysiol 2006; 60:194-201. 4.Ray O. The revolutionary health science of psychoendoneuroimmunology:a new paradigm for understanding health and treating illness. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1032:35-51. 5.McEwen BS. From molecules to mind. Stress, individual differences, and the social environment. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2001;935:42-9

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

What are the 'non technical' aspects of Psychiatry

Prasanna N. de Silva, Consultant Psychiatrist
08 January 2013

As a non-academic with a predominant neuroscience orientation, I welcome the contribution by Bracken and colleagues (1). This article is timely for the following reasons.

Firstly, on Revalidation (and avoidance of 'remediation'); the new format of annual appraisal appears to be slanted towards the so called 'technical competences' - involving psychopharmacology, specific psychotherapies (such as CBT) and, more generally, evidence of compliance with national and trust guidelines on disease management care pathways. The ability to work collaboratively with patients, carers and other professional colleagues to maintain engagement and adherence is tacitly recognized, but still considered secondary to demonstrating 'hard' (i.e. measurable) competences.

Therefore, practitioners who consider 'non technical' practices as their main purpose do so at their own risk. Furthermore, the problem of measuring non technical aspects of our work remains, despite the availability of the 'tick box' patient feedback via the 360 degree appraisals.

A key 'non technical' aspect of our work is service redesign, usuallyunder the banner of 'new ways of working'. However, we do not have sufficient outcome research nationally to base our local efforts. For example, we are unclear if the split between community and in-patient Consultant activity is more effective than different Consultants working into Psychoses and Affective disorder teams in both wards and in the community (the so called 'functional modal'). Similarly, we don't know if Consultant led triage is better than the now traditional 'single point of access' to Community teams (CMHTs) and crisis teams (gatekeepers to wards).

Service redesign projects carry major costs (including Consultant time) and therefore demands more professionalism to avoid wasting valuableresources. Surely it is time that the College Research Unit looked in to outcomes of service redesign projects across the UK in terms of readmissions, turnover, untoward events and poly pharmacy rates.

Finally - perhaps of most relevance to users and carers - is the issue of compassionate care (2, 3). In old age services, this area is highly topical with increasing involvement of politicians and the media. In my opinion, compassion should not only be directed at patients and carers, but also be a central component of relationships between front line caring staff when collaborating in patient care. Furthermore, of late, compassion has often been lacking in the relationships between caring staff and their managers. Perhaps medical managers should take a lead in developing this culture, which no doubt will assist further service development and productivity (not to mention staff retention).

Compassion is not emotional over involvement or maintenance of dependency; it can involve 'tough love' on occasion. In my opinion, it is a core aspect of recovery, the 'glue' holding the patient, carer and professionals in the joint enterprise of healing. It does not exclude robust physical and psychological therapies. It might well involve recognition of spiritual values and needs involved in the process of recovery. Perhaps psychiatrists (and their trainees) need to have a working knowledge of the major religions as well as some lesser known forms of faith (such as spiritualism), in order to understand their patients presentations and motivations.

References 1. Bracken, P., Thomas, P., Timimi S. Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm The British journal of psychiatry (2012) vol 201, pp 430-434 2. Gilbert, P. Introducing compassion focussed therapy Advances in psychiatric treatment (2009) vol 15, pp 199-208 3. Boyce, N. Alys Cole-King; a pioneer of suicide mitigation in the UK. The Lancet (2011) vol 375, issue 9791, p 561

... More

Conflict of interest: The opinions expressed are not those of my employer

Write a reply

Academia versus the Masses

Saad F. Ghalib, consultant old age psychiatrist
02 January 2013

The article by Bracken,et al(BJP 2012;201) has raised some fairly warranted concerns. I am afraid the situation is more serious than one is prepared to contemplate. It goes deep into our understanding of what mental illness is. For example, any serious attempt to set precise phenomenological limits on what a delusion is will soon run into difficulties! Should some cultural, political or religious beliefs be considered delusional? Conversely, a good number of people who do not suffer from mental illness do occasionally experience psychotic symptoms (1)! Or probably we should ask different cultures as to their understanding of depressed mood as a symptom of depression? We would most certainly get several different interpretations ranging from the cognitiveto the somatic as well as the spectrum in between. It's about time that the prescriptive nature of current classification systems is called into question; for example, the ICD-10 choice of' loss of interest' as a'' core'' feature of depressive episodes, whereas' reduced self-esteem' is relegated to secondary symptoms! No wonder why talk of biological reductionism should probably be taken with a big pinch of salt. Talk of top-down or bottom-up approach of psychiatric disorders is unrealistic andcan be outright damaging. Extensive research has thus far yielded no precise causal factors for most psychiatric disorders. Indeed, there are potential risks, ranging from the psychological to the biological and the social. However, none of these potential risks is either necessary or sufficient for the development of mental illness. Let's be clear, selling the biological model to the public is about ''choosing'' (driven by academia) one school of thought over another, rather than being ''true'' natural reductionism. A mental health symptom can potentially have a range of meanings to different individuals, depending on its place within a particular individual's narrative. The said individual narrative is influenced by a host of variables. Therefore, it would make sense to rid the upcoming classification systems of as many labels as possible, but also to attempt a tentative approach towards some basic definitions of common symptoms within the context of the patient's life narrative. Symptoms related to mental health (contrary to physical disorders) should be set locally, within the context of patients' culture, semantics and life story, ratherthan ''dictated'' from without. Failing to do so will render psychiatric signs and symptoms completely meaningless. Notwithstanding this, it should be emphasized that the identification of psychiatric signs and symptoms is by no means a grantee that the end result is a valid disorder.It is just possible that, none of our current diagnostic labels can claim a true existence in nature!Response to placebo can indeed be highly effective. However, if patients' improvement is in part due to some placebo response, let's make sure that their expectations are grounded in reality rather than being shaped by pharmaceutical marketing or some vague biological reasoning in situations where it is not applicable.Reference; Kelleher I, Jenner J A, Cannon M. Psychotic symptoms in the general population-an evolutionary perspective. BJP 2010; 197; 167-169.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

Territorial disputes

Peter Kinderman, Director
19 December 2012

Dear Sir or Madam:

Territorial disputes are a zero sum game: if one side gains ground itcan only be at the expense of the other. As clinical psychologists, it wastherefore with a wry smile that we read the recent paper by Bracken and colleagues (1), which calls for psychiatry "to move beyond the dominance of the current, technological paradigm" and towards an understanding of mental health problems not as diseases of the brain, but as involving "social, cultural and psychological dimensions".

We agreed with much of the paper's substance, yet found ourselves concerned by the implied route to implementation. Given their audience, Bracken and colleagues can be forgiven for failing to acknowledge the existence of clinical psychology; yet their arguments owe a great deal to advances, both theoretical and empirical, made in this field. By calling for psychiatry to shift its epistemology and praxis, it might seem not only that that they want to adopt an alternative philosophy, but quietly to move their tanks onto the lawns of fellow professionals.

One could follow their argument to a different conclusion. If the goal is a mental health care system in which problems are seen principallyas "social, cultural, and psychological" in origin rather than biomedical,then the case for having medically trained professionals in positions of seniority is substantially weakened. Rather, clinical leadership would need to be provided by people who have received a comparably extensive training in psychological, social and cultural causes of distress.

Reforming the whole of psychiatry from the inside out can hardly be the most practical means of realising this vision. Instead, consider that there are some 10,000 clinical psychologists in the UK, the majority of whom work in the NHS. A substantial number of psychiatric posts go unfilled,(2) while clinical psychologist posts are being cut and downgraded across the country despite training places being vastly oversubscribed. We could begin by imposing a moratorium on filling psychiatric posts and use the money saved (in the order of ?100 million pounds, at a conservative estimate) to reverse the process of downgrading,increase the number clinical psychologists at higher leadership grades andexpand the number of training places. That - at zero net cost to the NHS -could help move us toward Bracken and colleagues' vision.

To be clear, this is not an "antipsychiatry" argument. We do not dispute psychiatric expertise in several technical areas, principally psychopharmacology. Whilst the benefits of neuroleptic medication have often been gravely overstated (3) and the utility of diagnostic categoriesis a source of constant dispute,(4) we would not be amongst those who denythat pharmacological interventions are ever a useful part of the treatmentarmoury, nor would we join the ranks of those criticising the profession of psychiatry. But if we want mental health services to be structured around the epistemological and theoretical assumptions outlined by Brackenand colleagues, psychiatry should not aspire to colonise the territory of social, cultural, and psychological disciplines, but instead adopt a more genuinely equitable stance.

Yours sincerely

Professor Peter Kinderman Director, Institute for Psychology, Health and Society University of Liverpool Brownlow Street Liverpool L69 3GL +44-151-794-5533

Dr Sam Thompson Trainee Clinical Psychologist University of East London Stratford Campus Water Lane London E15 4LZ


(1) Bracken P et al. Psychiatry beyond the current paradigm. The British Journal of Psychiatry 2012; 201: 430-434. (2) (3) Whitaker R. The case against antipsychotic drugs: a 50-year record of doing more harm than good. Medical Hypotheses 2004; 62: 5-13. (4) Kinderman P, Read J, MoncriefJ, Bentall R. Drop the language of disorder. Evidence-Based Mental Health (2012); Online First, 10.1136/eb- 2012-100987.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

Dear Sir,

Michael Fitzgerald, Psychiatrist
19 December 2012

Dear Editor,

1.Bracken and Colleagues Psychiatry Beyond the Current Paradigm.

Bracken and Colleagues make some very interesting points. They point out that "psychiatry is not neurology". My view is that modern psychiatry is neurology or neuropsychiatry and will remain so. The issues that the authors discuss in their paper will in future be dealt with by non-medicalmental health practitioners including Psychologists, Social Workers, Support Groups, Psychotherapists.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Michael M. Fitzgerald.

1. Bracken P, Thomas P, Timimi S. Asen E., Behr G., Beuster C., Bhunnoos., Brown I., Chhina N., Double D., Downer S., Evans C., Fernando S., Garland M., Hopkins W., Huws R., Johnson B., Martindale B., Middleton H., Moldavsky D., Moncrieff j., Mullins S., Nelki J., Pizzo M., Rodger J.,Smyth M., Summerfield D., Wallace J., Yeomans D., Psychiatry Beyond the Current Paradigm, British Journal of Psychiatry 2012, 201, 430/434.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

The current paradigm is not recruiting

Jonny N. Martell, F1 doctor
19 December 2012

As a junior doctor interested in pursuing a career in psychiatry, it came as a relief to read Bracken et al's special article and Kleinman's editorial. On neuroscience's paltry offering for people with serious mental illness and those working at the clinical coal face to treat them, I was cheered by the latter's comment, "this should count as an extraordinary failure." Neuroscience drip-feeds psychiatry a multitude offascinating glimpses into psychopathology that remain largely meaningless for those most in need of help.

Perhaps the College's efforts to address psychiatry's recruitment crisis should shift the focus from marketing towards a more rigorous scrutiny of the shortcomings of the product. The causes for poor recruitment are multi-factorial but these articles call into question the disconnect between the science claiming to underpin clinical practice and the practice itself. I suspect that many medical students intuitively sense what Bracken et al state more explicitly to be evidence based medicine- that recovery from psychiatric disorders is as much to do with the non-technological aspects of treatment such as relationships, meaning and community, than more readily measurable interventions, be they pharmacological or psychotherapeutic. No amount of marketing zeal is going to heal this impression.

The articles' generous helpings of professional humility for the endless false dawn of neuroscience will no doubt be problematic for those persuaded of the need for psychiatry to strengthen its bio-medical credentials. Psychiatrists' costliness amidst shrinking healthcare budgets and their professional identity as doctors are at stake after all.Yet these should not obscure the contention that evidence- based care demands of psychiatry to look beyond the mindless confines of the current paradigm, even if this threatens to undermine much of the veneer of scientific respectability to which psychiatry aspires.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

Psychotherapy within the current paradigm

Alasdair J Macdonald, Consultant psychiatrist
19 December 2012

This is a timely article and I hope that it will lead to further discussions.

Cognitive-behavioural therapy (CBT) is indeed widely promoted today. However, its effects are not proven to be greater than other therapies. The Swedish nation-wide project to offer CBT to all has been formally abandoned this year as it was more expensive and less effective than the previous mixed economy of psychotherapies.

The statement that '...non-specific factors...account for 85% of the variance in therapeutic outcomes across the psychotherapy field.' is drawnfrom Lambert's 'best guess' published in 1992. Seligman (1995) reports that all models have similar outcomes but that clients given a choice of model and therapist do better. Wampold (2001) suggests that the model (whether manualised or not) accounts for only 1% of the variance, other specific effects amounting to 8%. Client factors including the client's view of the therapeutic alliance produce 22% of the variance. The remaining 70% is related to non-specific factors.

In my experience, a good therapeutic relationship with the patient greatly improves medication compliance (see Panayotov 2011), which is a useful benefit even if formal psychotherapy is not the primary intention.

Dr Alasdair J Macdonald.

Lambert, MJ (1992) 'Implications of outcome research for psychotherapy integration', in Norcross, JC and Goldfried, MR (eds), Handbook of Psychotherapy Integration. New York: Basic Books. (pp. 94-129).

Panayotov P, Anichkina A, Strahilov B (2011) Solution-focused brieftherapy and long-term medical treatment compliance / adherence with patients suffering from schizophrenia: a pilot naturalistic clinical observation. In Franklin C, Trepper T, Gingerich WJ, McCollum E (eds) Solution-focused Brief Therapy: A Handbook of Evidence-Based Practice. Oxford University Press: New York 2011.

Seligman MEP (1995) The Effectiveness of Psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 50:965-974.

Wampold BM. The Great Psychotherapy Debate: Models, Methods and Findings. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: New Jersey 2001.

... More

Conflict of interest: I have published original articles and textbooks including matter on psychotherapy outcome.

Write a reply

The eclectic mish-mash

Diyanath Samarasinghe, Associate Professor
19 December 2012

This thought provoking piece attempts to push psychiatry off the fence it now uncomfortably occupies. But the authors cannot really hope tostop us tipping over to the applied neuroscience side, given the steady shift of our centre of gravity in this direction.

Nearly all of the arguments mustered in the article apply equally to General Practice, which does not appear to suffer at all from a crisis of identity. This is probably because that profession is not being dumbed-down. It has not lost a previously held set of skills. Nor has its soul been taken over by a commercial juggernaut.

Psychiatry will not be able to recapture its soul unless it regains the lost skills. And our collective skill may now have dropped below the critical mass needed for regeneration. And I don't mean skills in psychoanalysis or CBT. What the authors call the non-technical aspects of treatment are the more fundamental skills.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply

The Case for Narrative in Psychiatry

Erick Messias, Medical Director
19 December 2012

It is striking, and somewhat disheartening, that we psychiatrists need to be reminded of the limitations of technology and the power of relationships. This feeling is only compounded by the current resurgence of interest in narrative within the practice of medicine (1).

The power of narrative is not alien to any practicing psychiatrist. As a medical specialty, we have always had a stake and an interest in personal stories and on the individual person; psychotherapy skills and attitudes have defined psychiatry for a long time, although in the last few years there has been a significant downward trend of practicing psychiatrists providing psychotherapy in most patient encounters (2).

These changes in practice and the fetish of technology should not take us from taking an interest and using narrative to help our patients -through the many challenges they face on their way to recovery. We are theones present when grief strikes, when delusions and hallucinations haunt, we are the ones who try to make sense of behavior, who are ready to face tragedy, and to be with our patients. We have much more to offer than pills or brain scans, as useful as they can be, and are. Instead of losingthese narrative skills we should strive to see our profession whole as neuroscientists and therapists, not as one or the other.

Using narrative, far from making us less doctors, will help us be better psychiatrists, physicians, and we can only hope better persons.

1.Charon R. Narrative medicine : honoring the stories of illness. Oxford University Press, 2006.

2.Mojtabai R, Olfson M. National trends in psychotherapy by office-based psychiatrists. Archives of general psychiatry. 2008; 65(8): 962-70.

... More

Conflict of interest: None declared

Write a reply


Reply to: Submit a response

Your details

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *