Stretched services leaving psychiatrists ‘in emotional and ethical distress'
It comes as a survey of RCPsych members found almost three-quarters felt they had made decisions to admit or discharge people based on factors other than what is in the patient's best interests.
According to Dr Smith, 'long-term underinvestment and a failure to follow an evidence-based approach has led to an erosion of standards in the mental health system'.
She will add: 'Despite this, mental health staff across the NHS continue to provide outstanding care in the face of unprecedented demand and workforce pressures.
'Psychiatrists are committed to providing expert and timely treatment that prevents people entering mental health crisis.
'But the reality is that current targets are not based on patient outcomes. Pressures that override clinical judgment, combined with inadequate inpatient and community provision, are damaging the very foundations of compassionate, therapeutic and holistic care.
'Repeated failure to attend to the pressures facing mental health services mean that provisions are now so threadbare that psychiatrists are having to make life and death decisions based on financial rather than clinical concerns.
'At worst, these systemic pressures prevent clinicians from delivering the care they know is needed, risking people becoming more unwell, resulting in greater risk of mental health crisis and increased risk of suicide. This is causing deep distress and moral injury among psychiatrists.'
Of the 860 RCPsych members who completed the survey in England, 73% felt they had made decisions to admit or discharge patients based on factors outside clinical need.
Meanwhile, more than eight in 10 (81%) said they had experienced feelings of guilt, shame, burnout and frustration over these decisions.
Members said a lack of investment in community mental health services lead to more patients going into crisis, while a lack of affordable housing is causing delayed discharges.
Almost half (47%) of those who responded to the survey said they are facing delays in admitting or treating people because of a lack of local capacity.
Dr Smith will add: 'These findings paint a stark picture of longstanding systemic issues in the way mental health services are currently commissioned and delivered.'
She said the upcoming 10 Year Health Plan 'presents the perfect opportunity' for the Government to outline a 'clear ambition for the prevention and treatment of serious mental illness'.
'Alongside this, we need to see an updated long-term workforce plan with a recommitment to double medical school places as well as bolder promises to retain the workforce and increase specialty training places,' Dr Smith will tell delegates.
An NHS spokesperson, said: 'The pandemic has had a huge impact on the nation's mental health with NHS staff treating a million more people now than we did in 2019, which is why we've drastically expanded access and boosted our mental health workforce by over 40,000 staff.
'We know more needs to be done to increase access to inpatient services, which is why we are working with the Government on the upcoming NHS 10 year-plan to create a service that is better for patients and is fit for the future.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
44 minutes ago
- Times
Striking doctors claiming to care about patients? It's a sick joke
The British Medical Association confirmed that a five-day NHS strike would go ahead from Friday VUK VALCIC/SOPA IMAGES/LIGHTROCKET VIA GETTY IMAGES W hen hospital doctors strike they routinely trot out the claim that they are doing it for the patients. Their desire for generous pay awards (to add to pensions that are the envy of the private sector) is billed as almost incidental to their mission to save the National Health Service. Failure to award them a double-digit pay rise, they explain, will result in catastrophe for the health service. And why? Because, says the British Medical Association, the professional body for doctors turned militant trade union, young medics would be 'forced' to hightail it to sunny Australia to line their pockets. They wouldn't be able to help themselves. The activists in the BMA fomenting a new and scarcely believable round of strikes, beginning on Friday with a five-day stoppage, should stop insulting the public's intelligence with this offensive cant, wipe away their crocodile tears and admit that it's all about the cash. The price: thousands of patients will end up in more pain and for longer, or die earlier, because of their grotesque selfishness. The NHS, which these wreckers always claim to revere, will be plunged into chaos again, just as it is recovering from 44 days of strikes in 2023-24. And what is the BMA's latest pay claim? Resident doctors — hospital doctors who are not consultants, previously known as junior doctors — want 29 per cent. Yes, really. That is on top of a 22 per cent rise last year. After the Labour government's capitulation to the BMA in 2024, it is trying to return to relative normality this year with an above-inflation offer of 5.4 per cent, in line with the pay review body recommendation and the most generous offer in the public sector. Wes Streeting, the health secretary, is trying to talk sense into the strike leaders, offering the olive branch of reduced student debt. But having shown weakness once Mr Streeting finds himself in the all-too-predictable position of facing an emboldened opponent confident in its power. The good news is that Sir Jim Mackey, chief executive of NHS England, has refused to play the BMA's game and is insisting that routine operations carry on. Tom Dolphin, chair of the BMA council, and Emma Runswick, his deputy, have called for all non-urgent procedures to be cancelled, claiming that doing otherwise would 'put patients at risk'. Their hypocrisy is nauseating: it is the BMA that is placing patients in peril. The BMA's cynicism does not end there. When resident doctors strike it falls to consultants to fill the gaps. These aristocrats of the NHS, enjoying basic salaries up to £140,000, not including private work and overtime, are being advised by the union to charge £313 an hour for strike night cover. This is rampant profiteering. Only 26,800 BMA resident doctors voted to strike out of 53,800. Some 22,000 resident doctors are not in the BMA. So just a third of all resident doctors voted yes to misery. The silent majority should back the NHS. Medical graduates start their professional training on £36,000; by their early thirties they are earning £70,000. From then on it is a staircase to comfort. NHS doctors enjoy a super-perk they prefer not to highlight: generous, index-linked defined benefit pensions resulting in retirement incomes greater than most salaries. The public needs to understand how much it is paying for the retirements of these arrogant, entitled, callous strikers. The BMA is now in danger of overreaching itself, of forfeiting public respect. A 29 per cent pay claim, following a 22 per cent one, is a sick joke.
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
NHS launches major search for donors with rare blood types
The NHS has launched a pioneering initiative to identify and secure blood donations from individuals with rare blood types, ensuring patients receive "precision-matched" transfusions. This UK-first drive aims to mitigate the risk of adverse reactions for those requiring blood. Scientists have embarked on a large-scale research project, DNA -testing the blood of 77,000 donors to date. Blood collected from these rare donors will be frozen, creating a vital reserve for others with the same specific blood type. Crucially, this stored blood will also be available to the donor themselves, should they ever require a transfusion. NHS Blood and Transplant (NHSBT) underscores the critical importance of precise blood matching, citing the intricate nature of blood groups, with 362 known types. The organisation stated that blood matching is "vital" given this complexity, highlighting the necessity of this new approach to enhance patient safety. This is the first time that blood types have been DNA tested in the UK at-scale, NHSBT said. Dozens of rare blood donors have been identified during the process and it is hoped the number will rise to hundreds. This means that blood from these donors can be used as 'personalised, precision-matched transfusion' for those in need. This can help avoid severe transfusion reactions – where the body sees the transfused blood as 'foreign' and rejects it. People who are particularly at risk of these reactions are those who regularly receive blood donations including those with sickle cell disorder and thalassaemia. Experts hailed the project as the 'first major step' towards rolling out precision-matched blood more widely. Dr Gail Miflin, chief medical officer at NHSBT, said: 'Taking these 77,000 donors and testing their blood to such a precise level has been an incredible undertaking and will work to significantly change the way we issue blood – especially to those patients at higher risk of transfusion-related reactions. 'We will be able to match to an increasing number of blood groups, ensuring that patients have blood that is most similar to their own and reducing the risk of any reactions. 'It is an example of just how we are driving innovation which can radically improve patient outcomes.' NHSBT's genomics programme director, Kate Downes, added: 'This inventory of blood will enhance our capacity to find units with rare blood groups for difficult to match patients as well as provide better matched units for patients who have an increased risk of transfusion reactions, aiding us in our mission to save and improve even more lives. 'This genotyping is a first major step towards rolling out precision-matched blood more widely, which would be a landmark change in how blood is matched.'
The Independent
7 hours ago
- The Independent
US organ donation system faces scrutiny and changes after reports of disturbing near-misses
The U.S. is developing new safeguards for the organ transplant system after a government investigation found a Kentucky group continued preparations for organ donation by some patients who showed signs of life, officials told Congress Tuesday. While the organ removals were canceled, near misses that some lawmakers called horrifying should never happen. A House subcommittee asked how to repair trust in the transplant network for potential organ donors and families -- some of whom have opted out of donor registries after these cases were publicized. 'We have to get this right,' said Rep. Brett Guthrie, a Kentucky Republican who chairs the Energy and Commerce Committee and whose mother died waiting for a liver transplant. 'Hopefully people will walk away today knowing we need to address issues but still confident that they can give life,' Guthrie said, adding that he will remain a registered organ donor. The hearing came after a federal investigation began last fall into allegations that a Kentucky donation group pressured a hospital in 2021 to proceed with plans to withdraw life support and retrieve organs from a man despite signs that he might be waking up from his drug overdose. That surgery never happened after a doctor noticed him moving and moaning while being transported to the operating room — and the man survived. Lawmakers stressed most organ donations proceed appropriately and save tens of thousands of lives a year. But the federal probe – concluded in March but only made public ahead of Tuesday's hearing -- cited a 'concerning pattern of risk' in dozens of other cases involving the Kentucky group's initial planning to recover someone's organs. The report said some should have been stopped or reassessed earlier, and mostly involved small or rural hospitals with less experience in caring for potential organ donors. The Kentucky organ procurement organization, or OPO, has made changes and the national transplant network is working on additional steps. But notably absent Tuesday was any testimony from hospitals – whose doctors must independently determine a patient is dead before donation groups are allowed to retrieve organs. Here's a look at how the nation's transplant system works. There's a dire need for organ donation More than 100,000 people are on the U.S. transplant list and about 13 a day die waiting, according to the Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network. Only about 1% of deaths occur in a way that allows someone to even be considered for organ donation. Most people declared dead in a hospital will quickly be transferred to a funeral home or morgue instead. How the U.S. organ transplant system is set up Several groups are involved in every transplant: the hospital caring for someone dead or dying; the 55 OPOs that coordinate recovery of organs and help match them to patients on the waiting list; and transplant centers that decide if an organ is the right fit for their patients. Adding to the complexity, two government agencies — HRSA, the Health Resources and Services Administration, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services — share regulatory oversight of different parts of the donation and transplant process. How deceased donation works Most organ donors are brain-dead – when testing determines someone has no brain function after a catastrophic injury. The body is left on a ventilator to support the organs until they can be retrieved. But increasingly organs are donated after circulatory death, called DCD – when people die because their heart stops. It usually happens when doctors determine someone has a nonsurvivable injury and the family withdraws life support. Donation groups don't provide hands-on patient care Hospitals are required to alert their area OPO to every potential donor who is declared brain-dead or once the decision to withdraw life support is made. The OPOs by law can't participate in that decision and "we are not even in the room at that time,' said Barry Massa of Kentucky's Network for Hope. During the following days of preparation, hospital employees continue caring for the patient – while the donation team talks with the family about the process, gathers hospital records showing the patient is eligible, requests tests of organ quality, and make arrangements with transplant centers to use them. Once the hospital withdraws life support and the heart stops beating there's a mandatory wait – five minutes – to be sure it won't restart. When the doctor declares death, the organ retrieval process can begin. Organs are only considered usable if death occurs relatively quickly, usually up to about two hours. Sometimes that takes much longer and thus the organs can't be used – and HRSA's Dr. Raymond Lynch told Congress that doesn't necessarily mean anything was done wrong. Still, he said HRSA is investigating reports of possible mistakes elsewhere. 'This is a technically demanding form of care' that requires 'good collaboration between the OPO and the hospital,' he said. What happens next At issue is how doctors are sure when it's time to withdraw life support from a dying patient — and the delicate balance of how OPOs interact with hospital staff in preparing for donation once death occurs. In May, HRSA quietly ordered the U.S. transplant network to oversee improvements at the Kentucky OPO and to develop new national policies making clear that anyone – family, hospital staff or organ donation staff – can call for a pause in donation preparations any time there are concerns about the patient's eligibility. Lynch said the government now wants more proactive collaboration from OPOs to give hospital staff 'a clear understanding' of when to at least temporarily halt and reevaluate a potential donor if their health status changes. Kentucky's Massa said his group only received HRSA's reports this week – but that after learning about last fall's allegations, it made some changes. Massa said every hospital doctor and nurse now gets a checklist on caring for potential donors and how to pause when concerns are raised — and anyone can anonymously report complaints. ___ The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute's Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.
