A missed opportunity

The Francis report, with its catalogue of total system failure, was profoundly shocking - and especially so for the families of those who died unnecessarily or whose basic care was neglected; up to 1200 excess patient deaths have been reported. ^{Reference Rayner and Adams1} The report called for compassionate care throughout the NHS, but did not explain how such compassion was to be cultivated or measured. The response from the Royal College of Psychiatrists to the Francis recommendations - occasional paper OP92 ² - was not, however, a radical call for change in NHS structure, nor did it consider the question implicit in the Francis report: ‘Is the business model for healthcare fit for purpose?’ Yet Sue Bailey, in her robust foreword as College President, was strident in her indictment of the Trust's total failure to put patients first, and pointed to the danger of apathy and learned helplessness among psychiatrists. The College's response, however, indirectly highlighted the lack of conceptual thought about what constitutes compassionate empathy and care, and what are the philosophical, religious and existential understandings of personhood and person-centred medicine. The extent to which practitioners' compassionate values go deeply enough, and are derived from healthy moral communities, are other questions that could have been addressed.

Wide-ranging evidence of failure

The College's Centre for Quality Improvement (CCQ I) is tasked with considering many of these key questions - and their work could be foundational. Many faith groups have traditions and current practices that are useful resources for compassion, ^{Reference Armstrong3} and the College in its report has correctly acknowledged the need for professionals' well-being to be considered alongside that of the patient. In our experience it is challenging and stressful to maintain compassion in the face of overwhelming workloads, shortage of staff, an inappropriate team mix and intrusive management. These factors each need to also be addressed.

The proposal, laid out in OP92, to publish a code of ethics for College members is welcome, but this should also provide a broad moral and ethical framework for all healthcare. For example, Gilbert et al ^{Reference Gilbert, Maruthappu, Leaver and Gray4} question the moral integrity of the NHS on the grounds of lack of meaningful patient choice and limited evidence for efficiency savings. We, too, describe the erosion of professional idealism and the effect of the target-driven mindset that can lead to the loss of vocation and of compassion. ^{Reference Cox and Gray5} We, too, question whether the business model in its present form is fit for purpose; community psychiatry - historically, the bastion of imaginative innovation in mental healthcare - has become ossified by the shift of control from clinician to management. ^{Reference Tyrer6} Other research suggests that lack of control causes ‘flame out’ by lowering self-directedness and reducing self-transcendence. ^{Reference Raycheva, Asenova, Kazakov, Yordanovd, Tarnovska and Stoyanov7} There is dissonance between the business and medical models of care, which can precipitate poor care for the patient, and work failure, family breakdown and personal tragedy for the clinician. ^{Reference Morrison and Gillies8,Reference McCabe9}

The way forward

The College plans to update its response to the Francis inquiry in 6 months. Collaboration in this effort with other medical Royal Colleges and with other professional and patient groups, as well as with moral philosophers, is highly desirable. There is much imaginative writing in this field, not only from moral philosophers but also from ethicists and comparative religion experts, ^{Reference Armstrong3,Reference Gill10} which will help to sharpen the conceptual understanding of patient-centred care. If this collaboration is outside the remit of the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, then it could be outsourced to an alliance of other healthcare-related organisations, similar to the Mental Health Alliance (www.mentalhealthalliance.org.uk).

David Owen ^{Reference Owen11} has called for emergency legislation to be enacted in 2015, within 3 months of the general election, to reinstate the NHS as provider of a comprehensive service and to get rid of marketisation of healthcare. The College should join this national debate, and consider Chronos and Kairos when updating OP92. Chronos demands the update to be completed within 6 months, which could be facilitated by a survey of College members' opinion. Yet this is also a crucial Kairos moment - a pivotal flashpoint for medicine as a whole - as it considers whether the business model itself is fit for purpose. It is an opportunity not to be missed.