Latest news with #RachelClarke
The Guardian
21-07-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
As a long-term psychiatric patient, I've had superior care from the NHS
I read with interest the letters about psychiatric care in the NHS (11 July), prompted by Rachel Clarke's review of Bella Jackson's book Fragile Minds (A furious assault on NHS psychiatry, 30 June). I have not read the book but, as a long-term psychiatric patient, I would like to make two points. First, care naturally varies in quality, suitability and success. Following three years in unsatisfactory private care (after many previous years in NHS care), I have happily returned to the NHS. I find its care superior, but hamstrung by limited resources, which can mean waiting many months for an appointment. But I have never been treated badly, as Jackson suggests is common, even when in the worst state. Second, I was struck by what Jackson says a junior doctor said to her (as quoted by Clarke): ''Let's quetiapine them today!' And I asked him why quetiapine, and he said, 'They put you in the best hotels for conferences.'' As Clarke says, this is ludicrous, and certainly the only time I have heard 'quetiapine' used as a verb, which strikes me as improbable. Quetiapine has been a generic drug since 2012 (ie open to any company to manufacture and market, just as, say, paracetamol is). I cannot believe that a junior doctor would prescribe it in the hope of being put up in a 'best hotel' for a conference. It has long been the first-line treatment for psychosis, and for good reason: it works. I have been on quetiapine for 15 years. It's not an enviable position to be in, but I am glad it exists, and grateful to those who have – quite rightly – prescribed it to and address supplied I was disappointed to read that Cathy Wield was 'subjected to increasingly damaging interventions, including electroconvulsive therapy' (Letters, 11 July). I was treated with ECT for severe depression (with my full consent) in 2006 and it saved my life. In subsequent years when I had relapses, it again was highly effective as a treatment and I recovered fully, and have been well for the last five years. I would hope that patients won't dismiss ECT as a potential treatment for depression based on its negative portrayal in the press, but be guided by NHS professionals who prescribe what they believe is best for the individual and address supplied
The Guardian
11-07-2025
- Health
- The Guardian
Fundamental flaws in the NHS psychiatric system
I am disappointed to read such a scathing review of Bella Jackson's book Fragile Minds (A furious assault on NHS psychiatry, 30 June). It is a difficult read, and yet I thought that Jackson wrote about her experiences with compassion for both patients and staff unwittingly caught up in erratic and overstretched services. I am a doctor, with experience as a psychiatric patient and as a senior 'staff grade' doctor on an acute psychiatric ward. My memoir, Unshackled Mind: A Doctor's Story of Trauma, Liberation and Healing, confirms Jackson's claims that abuses do happen in these places. More subtly, there is a continued reliance on the disease-centred model of biomedical psychiatry without sufficient attention paid to the circumstances and adversities suffered by patients before they ever came in contact with psychiatry. As a result, my own early trauma was unaddressed for more than 20 years, while I was subjected to increasingly damaging interventions, including electroconvulsive therapy and even a cingulotomy. It is only since leaving psychiatry that I have been able to recover. Jackson's book is a reminder that despite the best intentions, many patients are failing to get the help they need in a fundamentally flawed psychiatric Cathy WieldAbingdon, Oxfordshire I am writing to congratulate Dr Rachel Clarke for her excellent rebuttal of Bella Jackson's assault on the failings of modern psychiatry. I have worked as the head of mental health law for a large NHS trust for 35 years, and as a frequent visitor to mental health wards, entirely agree that Jackson's views are at odds with my experience. I was last on a secure, forensic mental health ward just a few days ago – with incredibly challenging patients. All the staff I encountered were not only humane, but kind, compassionate and caring. I've also worked in roles where I visited many hospitals and have almost without exception experienced the same. Our mental health nurses and psychiatrists, as well as so many others, go out of their way to display the same values. I am far from naive, and recognise that there is a tiny minority of individuals who fail to live up to the same core values. Over decades I have witnessed interactions where psychiatrists, nurses and others are challenged to a degree that might seem almost impossible to cope with, but they rise to the challenge with great skill, kindness and compassion, in line with their respective professional codes of conduct. Kevin TowersHead of mental health law and data protection officer, West London NHS Trust I'm writing in response to the review by Rachel Clarke, especially the suggestion that the memoir is 'scaremongering'. I am a consultant clinical psychologist with more than 20 years' experience in the NHS across several London-based trusts. I train people, including ward staff and crisis services, in working effectively with people with personality disorder. Similar stories to those that Bella Jackson relates are reported to me and colleagues regularly. I don't doubt the veracity of Jackson's complaint, nor that NHS mental health is in a dire state; it is interesting that Clarke does, given her admission of relatively scant mental health and address supplied Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
The National
19-06-2025
- Politics
- The National
Westminster is set to decriminalise abortion - what about Scotland?
Abortion is still a crime in Scotland, England and Wales, under legislation which was passed in 1967. But in the Commons this week, an amendment to the Crime and Policing Bill will remove the threat of 'investigation, arrest, prosecution or imprisonment' of any woman who acts in relation to her own pregnancy. It comes after several high-profile cases where women have been arrested for illegal abortion offences. In Scotland, while the same 1960s legislation applies, and sets a number of limitations on the circumstances that allow an abortion can be granted, campaigners have said there is less 'urgency' for decriminalisation to be brought in north of the border. READ MORE: Holyrood governing body defends 'unfair' trans toilet ban Rachel Clarke, of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service (BPAS), explained: 'In England and Wales we've got underlying statute dating to the 1800s which is being used against women on a sort of semi-regular basis. 'More than 100 women have been investigated in recent years, six have ended up in court. There are also quite a few of those women who are still in the system awaiting a decision from prosecutors on whether their case is going to be taken to court. 'So for us, that change is very urgent and essential.' In one instance, Nicola Packer was taken to a police cell from hospital after delivering a still born baby at home. She had taken prescribed abortion medication at around 26 weeks pregnant, later telling jurors that she did not realise she had been pregnant for more than 10 weeks. The Westminster legislation, while decriminalising women, does not change the law relating to the provision of abortion services - such as the requirement to be approved by two doctors. Clarke explained that there hadn't been the same levels of criminalisation in Scotland, mostly due to the existence of common law that isn't 'used against women in the same way' as the Westminster statute. 'Because Scotland doesn't have that urgent problem, the work that we've been doing up there and that Back Off Scotland has been doing up there, has been about trying to do wholesale reform of the law as the first thing,' Clarke explained. 'To deal with the issues that we've got, but also to support some of the work that's going on around improved access, particularly at later gestations.' 'The most urgent thing in Scotland at the moment is the lack of services post 20 weeks.' READ MORE: Israel accused of 'hypocrisy' after calling hospital strike 'war crime' Abortions are permitted until 24 weeks under the current law, but if a woman in Scotland requires one after 20 weeks, they have to travel to England for specialist care. The Scottish Greens have recently called for abortion to be decriminalised in Scotland, but with the clock counting down to the Holyrood elections in 2026, there is little time on the parliamentary agenda to get legislation scrutinised and passed. The power to update the law on abortion was devolved to the Scottish Parliament in 2016. There has been ample time to tackle the issue. In January, Scottish Labour MSP Carol Mochan asked the Scottish Government when it plans to review the current legal framework on abortion. Women's health minister Jenni Minto pointed to a commitment made by Scottish Government ministers in the 2023 programme for government to review the law. An expert group is due to send a report to ministers in the summer, but she notes that 'proposals for changes to abortion law would be subject to a public consultation'. With the topic of abortion likely to spark a heated debate, it will undoubtedly be a lengthy, contentious process, whatever the expert group suggests. It is clear that the current law is outdated and crying out for reform - but with the aforementioned tight deadline for Holyrood legislation, it could be a long time until Scotland modernises the law on abortion.
The Guardian
15-06-2025
- Entertainment
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the Women's prize for nonfiction: shining a light where it's badly needed
Female nonfiction writers are paid less on average, receive fewer reviews and win fewer prizes than men. Unsurprisingly, this means that women sell fewer books. So far this year, more than 60% of titles on the UK's hardback and paperback nonfiction bestseller lists have been by men. Kate Mosse wants to change this. Famously, she set up the Women's prize for fiction after there was not a single woman on the 1991 Booker shortlist. This year Ms Mosse's award celebrates its 30th anniversary. With previous winners including Zadie Smith, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and Maggie O'Farrell, it has changed the publishing landscape to the extent that some suggest it is now redundant: last year, five out of the six books on the Booker prize shortlist were by women, and the winner was Samantha Harvey. Indeed, such is the pre-eminence of female novelists that there is talk of a crisis in men's fiction, and plans for an independent publisher, Conduit Books, especially for male authors. Nonfiction publishing, however, is a strikingly different story. Hence Ms Mosse's latest project: the Women's prize for nonfiction, which aims to do for female authors of serious narrative nonfiction what has already been achieved with fiction. Last year, Naomi Klein's quasi-memoir Doppelganger, about conspiracy theories and truth in politics, was the award's first winner. Last week, The Story of a Heart, by the doctor and writer Rachel Clarke, became the second, with her moving interweaving of the story of two children connected by a heart transplant with the history of heart surgery. Nonfiction books by women are not the only ones in need of help. With a few notable exceptions (including Prince Harry's memoir Spare and James Clear's self-help bestseller Atomic Habits), the overall picture for nonfiction publishing is bleak: last year, specialist and trade nonfiction combined had their lowest sales, in money terms, since 2015. In another blow for the publishing industry, last week a National Literacy Trust report revealed that reading for enjoyment among children and young people in the UK is at its lowest level in two decades. Only a quarter of teenage boys said they read books in their free time. One understandable response to figures like these is to emphasise the value of reading per se. But who and what we read matters as well as whether we do it. Part of the imbalance in nonfiction has been a historical perception of male expertise, particularly on certain topics. As with bias in class and race, publishing has been slow to address this proactively. In her 2021 book, The Authority Gap, examining why women are still taken less seriously than men, Mary Ann Sieghart stresses the importance of encouraging boys to read books about girls, and for men to seek out women's voices. There have been many efforts to address such discrimination constructively. Women Also Know Stuff, for example, is a database of experts created with the aim of increasing female representation. 'Most women fight wars on two fronts,' Rebecca Solnit wrote in her essay Men Explain Things to Me. 'One for whatever the putative topic is and one simply for the right to speak, to have ideas, to be acknowledged to be in possession of facts and truths, to have value.' For the help it offers to female authors fighting such battles, as well as the attention it brings to new books, the Women's prize for nonfiction should be welcomed.
Indian Express
13-06-2025
- Entertainment
- Indian Express
Yael van der Wouden wins 2025 Women's Prize for Fiction
Dutch debut novelist Yael van der Wouden has won the 2025 Women's Prize for Fiction with The Safekeep, while physician Rachel Clarke claimed the Nonfiction Prize for The Story of a Heart. Both receive £30,000 (approximately Rs 35 lakh )and the 'Bessie' statuette. Van der Wouden's winning novel, set in postwar Netherlands, explores Jewish identity through a haunting family saga. The intersex author dedicated her win to trans activists, sharing how her own healthcare struggles informed her writing. The Safekeep by Yael van der Wouden is the 30th winner of the Women's Prize for Fiction. This unsettling, tightly-plotted debut novel explores repressed desire and historical amnesia against the backdrop of the Netherlands post-WWII. The Safekeep is at once a highly-charged, claustrophobic drama played out between two deeply flawed characters, and a bold, insightful exploration of the emotional aftermath of trauma and complicity. Clarke's winning work offers a profound exploration of organ transplantation, blending medical history with deeply personal narratives. Good Girl – Aria Aber All Fours – Miranda July The Persians – Sanam Mahloudji Tell Me Everything – Elizabeth Strout The Safekeep – Yael van der Wouden Fundamentally – Nussaibah Younis A Thousand Threads – Neneh Cherry The Story of a Heart – Rachel Clarke Raising Hare – Chloe Dalton Agent Zo – Clare Mulley What the Wild Sea Can Be – Helen Scales Private Revolutions – Yuan Yang The judging panel, chaired by author Kit de Waal, praised The Safekeep as 'a masterful blend of history and suspense.' Established in 1996 to address gender inequality in publishing, the Women's Prize continues to champion exceptional writing by women.
