|
![]() |
|||
|
||||
| BSMHD Newsletter December 2004
CALL FOR PAPERS � 2005 BSMHD Annual Conference Nottingham The 2005 BSMHD Annual Conference will be held in Nottingham on Tuesday 24th May. Abstracts of papers for consideration by the conference committee are requested on any subject relating to Mental Health and Deafness. All presentations will be plenary sessions, presented in front of all conference delegates in a theatre style. The official languages for presentations will be English and British Sign Language. Simultaneous interpreting will be provided for all sessions between English and British Sign Language. All sessions will also have a verbatim speech to text transcription service. Abstracts must be submitted by email attachment (.doc, .txt, .rtf) to [email protected] by 11th March 2005. Full papers will be required by 13th May 2005 in order for interpreters to prepare for your presentation. There will also be a small exhibition attached to the conference, organisations interested in booking exhibition space please contact Sylvie Say, the conference organiser, at [email protected] .
The next BSMHD meeting will be held in partnership with the South West England Deaf Development Group in Exeter on 9th February 2005. This will be an opportunity to develop links with the Social Services Departments in the south west. BSMHD Meetings are open to all members and are free to attend. If you would like to attend please contact Jonathan Isaac [email protected]
Addington Palace, Croydon, 13th January 2005
Denmark House, Deaf mental health services is a bi-lingual and bi-cultural facility for deaf people with mental health problems. To ensure that each person�s human rights are respected reflection on our interaction is required. On the12th October 2004 a discussion event took place to discuss the results of an audit of our communication on Denmark House. Claire Connolly (trainee clinical psychologist) and Siew Lee Wong (Honorary Assistant Psychologist) had conducted the audit measuring types of communication taking place on the ward at a particular point in time and by whom. A quantitative analysis measured whether BSL, spoken English or simultaneous speech and sign was used and whether the person communicating was themselves deaf, hearing or a sign language interpreter. The preferred communication mode of the patients present was also noted. Additionally a qualitative analysis of the views of staff were collected through semi structured interview. Opinions covered areas such as preferred type of sign language training, feelings of isolation when with a group of staff whose first language differs to one�s own, feelings of frustration when pressures of work prevent one achieving the sign language proficiency to which one aspires, The results of communication audit were presented by Sally Austen, after which external facilitators, Alys Young and Rachel Hayes, chaired our discussion superbly. The morning gave the opportunity to look at people�s feeling and experiences around the part that communication plays in respecting each other�s human rights. Two discussion groups looked at the issues around working in a multi-lingual and multi-cultural environment and then key points were fed back by Sam Moorhouse, Adrian Harper, Neil Patterson and Steve Casey. This feedback was typed up by Noreen Howard and emailed to everyone. It was agreed that action points could be discussed further in a staff meeting such that we can measure our progress and have a similar discussion in a year�s time. Feedback on the discussion seems to be positive although many people said that they wished it had been longer.
26 � 30 October 2005 in Worcester, South Africa It is expected that 600 delegates from European countries, USA and Africa will participate in this Congress. The organising committee is committed to an open and transparent process which will involve all role players. The Congress will create the opportunity to bring people, organisations and local government structures in South Africa together in partnerships for a common cause. Public private partnerships will be extended to role players in the Western Cape, South Africa, SADC and within the NEPAD context. Already organisations of neighboring countries have approached the Institute for the Deaf to assist them in developing services for Deaf people. This Congress will raise the opportunity for them to become partners in the field of Deafness and related service areas. The Institute for the Deaf in Worcester SA will be the venue for the Congress. It is situated in the heart of the Cape Winelands, surrounded by magnificent vineyards and majestic mountains. A dedicated professional team who will be on duty throughout the conference. Accommodation for delegates will be provided on the campus, at a nearby resort and at guest houses in the surrounding area. The 2005 Congress is not merely an event but part of a process, which will contribute towards equity and accessibility for people with disabilities in South Africa. For more information on the Institute of the Deaf, please visit the Institute�s website at www.deafcare.co.za Congress Secretariat: PO Box 1169 Worcester 6849
Deaf Connections in Glasgow are looking at the best way to evaluate the effectiveness of the services we provide Deaf people. In particular, we are looking for tools and related information on measuring self-esteem and confidence, either for individuals or collectively. Has anyone designed or adapted indicators specifically for Deaf people? Has anyone got any ideas on the best way to measure Deaf people's sense of positive belonging to their community? One tool....the Rickter Scale has been suggested to us and we wondered if anyone had practical experience of using it with Deaf people. Responses would be appreciated please to [email protected]
A second draft of the mental health bill was published on September 8, 2004 The bill sets out the government's proposed reforms of the 1983 mental health act, which campaigners have long argued is out of date. The first draft bill, published in 2002, proposed removing a legal loophole that allows up to 600 dangerous people with severe mental disorders to avoid treatment by arguing that they gain no benefit from it. It also set out plans to extend compulsory treatment, so it could be imposed on people being cared for in the community as well as hospital patients. These proposals were overwhelmingly opposed by mental health campaigners, charities, service users, carers and professionals, who believed they were draconian and would reinforce the misconception that people with mental health problems are dangerous. Ministers claim that the revised version, addresses these concerns. Ministers believe the current legislation neither provides enough protection to the public, nor sufficient safeguards for individual patients. The existing act was drawn up when most people with mental health problems were treated in hospital, whereas now the vast majority are treated in the community. The bill revises the definition of "mental disorder" to cover "a disturbance in the functioning of the mind or brain resulting from any disability or disorder of the mind or brain. Examples of a mental disorder include schizophrenia, depression or a learning disability". The 1983 act's condition of "treatability" would also be removed so that there would be no exclusion of people who have a sole diagnosis of mental impairment or psychopathic disorder. Ministers estimate there are up to 2,400 people in the UK, described as having dangerous and severe personality disorder (DSPD). Although the vast majority are held in prison or a secure mental hospital, 300-600 live in the community. However, official estimates of how many people have DSPD have gone up and down since the first draft bill was published. Some experts - including the vice-president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCP), Dr Tony Zigmond, believe that there could be as few as a dozen people who meet the criteria in the community. He criticised the government for drawing up a new mental health law designed to deal with a dozen people that would affect 50,000. The government says that allowing the compulsory treatment of patients in the community will help those caught in a "revolving door" of relapse and readmission because they fail to take their medication. Ministers claim that the revised bill will limit these extended powers, so that only patients assessed in hospital can be forcibly treated in the community. But Dr Zigmond says that the wording of the bill means that the assessment could have been carried out years ago. Patients will be allowed to choose their own representative, who until now has always been their closest relative. The use of compulsory treatment beyond 28 days will have to be authorised by a new independent mental health tribunal. At present this happens only if the patient lodges an appeal. The bill will also introduce a right to independent advocacy to ensure that detained patients' interests are properly represented. It also proposes new safeguards to balance the rights of the child and the rights of their parents, by giving young people aged 16 or 17 the right to refuse treatment. Their decision could not be overruled by their parents. The draft bill has proved so controversial because both professionals and services users wanted a new bill to enshrine the right to assessment and treatment for people who wanted it and to reduce the amount of compulsion that already exists in the system. But the draft bill is regarded as widely extending powers to enforce treatment and/or detain people with mental illness or personality disorder. In 1998 the government commissioned an expert review of the mental health act under Genevra Richardson, professor of law at Queen Mary and Westfield College, London, which recommended that any extension of compulsion should be balanced by improvement of rights and safeguards for the individual. Although there are such improvements in the draft bill, professionals and service users say they go nowhere near far enough. Critics argue that the services provided to an individual would be determined by the level of risk they pose to others rather than as Prof Richardson proposed, the level of their mental capacity. The bill has succeeded in uniting mental health professionals, charities and service users in condemnation of its proposals. Campaigners have set up the Mental Health Alliance (MHA), a coalition of more than 60 organisations including the mental health charities Mind, Sane and Rethink, the Law Society and the RCP. The MHA is opposed to the bill's "draconian new powers of compulsion". It was unimpressed with the revised proposals which it said risked bringing mental health services to their knees as hundreds more people were brought under compulsory powers. Campaigners fear that the bill's emphasis on managing risk will reinforce the public misconception that mentally ill people are dangerous. Richard Brook, chief executive of the charity Mind, said the proposed legislation would not deliver an effective and compassionate 21st century mental health service. He said: "It risks introducing fear and coercion into what should be a purely therapeutic relationship. It risks driving those who most need care and treatment away from seeking help as and when they need it most." The bill will be subject to pre-legislative scrutiny by an expert parliamentary committee, which is due to report its findings by March 2005. This means the bill itself is unlikely to be introduced in parliament before the next general election. Source: www.SocietyGuardian.co.uk
A new page has been added to the BSMHD website listing resources available to professionals working with deaf people. The resources listed include books, videos and DVDs. Some have been reviewed and these reviews are also available. Please do visit the website and if you know of resources available that are not listed or would like to send in your own review send the details to [email protected]
In October 2002 The LINK Centre, in collaboration with the University
of Greenwich, undertook a major study into the impact of acquired profound
hearing loss for Deafened People. The study, which is being carried out by Paul Ashton (Research Assistant, University of Greenwich), Richard Hallam (Senior Advisor, University of Greenwich) and Maria Priestley (Research Manager, LINK), has now entered its third and final year. Preliminary findings will be available in May 2005. Dr Lorraine Gailey, LINK�s Chief Executive, said: ��The project will provide high quality social research in the field of health and social well being by documenting the effects of such deafness in adults. The findings will be used to guide rehabilitation solutions and community actions. It will also focus on the impact on the families of those deafened people who themselves become socially isolated as a result of their relative�s hearing loss. ��Very little academic research on the psychosocial impact on the individual and their family has been carried out, either nationally or internationally. ��There is little awareness of the effects of this kind of deafness, even amongst health professionals,�� said Dr Gailey. ��The provision of specific rehabilitation and support services in the NHS, Social Services and in the voluntary sector is poor relative to other types of hearing loss. Research is needed on people who aren�t currently getting access to voluntary or statutory services��. A number of themes are already emerging such as the profound impact on couples' relationships, the difficulty for even close partners to make adjustments to communication and the importance of religious faith. At the end of the project (autumn 2005) we will be presenting our findings at a national conference hosted by LINK and at various symposia to health professionals. For further information, please contact Maria Priestley at the LINK Centre
Tuesday 8th March 2005, Central London In association with: The Sainsbury Centre for Mental Health Visit the conference website at http://www.neilstewartassociates.com/sh173 The widely publicised inequality of treatment within mental health services of people from black and ethnic minority communities has moved this issue to the forefront of the Government's agenda. Recent initiatives include the appointment in October 2004 of the first ever Equality and Human Rights Director for the NHS to spearhead the service's equality agenda. The Government has specifically acknowledged that retraining mental health service workers in 'cultural competence' in the health, social care and criminal justice sectors is a priority. This is particularly important for health bodies in view of their statutory duty to co-operate with Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements and the next wave of transfers of funding and commissioning responsibility for health care within prisons to Primary Care Trusts due to take place in April 2005. This conference will look specifically at the Government's latest proposals to promote race equality in mental health services, ways of promoting workforce recruitment and training, and evolving good practice in multi-agency initiatives involving health, social care and criminal justice services, to ensure that the mental health needs of BME communities are effectively addressed. Conference Chair: Jon Silverman, Broadcaster and Journalist, BBC Speakers: Peter Scott Blackman, Director, The Afiya Trust. Cathy Stancer, Director, Women in Prison. Melba Wilson, BME Mental Health Service Improvement, Greater London Authority. Frances Crook, Chief Executive, Howard League for Penal Reform. Fees: Full Rate (Central Government departments and agencies, non-departmental public bodies, commercial sector) £395.00 + VAT (£464.13) Reduced Rate (NHS, Local Authorities) £285.00 + VAT (£334.88) Supported Rate (Voluntary Organisations and Trade Unions) £175.00 + VAT (£205.63) To request a copy of the conference brochure, please contact Jim Hendry on 020 7324 4361 or email [email protected] Note: The articles that appear on this website are for information only - inclusion does not imply endorsement of the contents by BSMHD Contact us Or send us an Email [email protected] |
||||
|
||||
Your use of this site is in accordance with our Privacy Statement © British Society for Mental Health and Deafness, 2004-10 |
||||