I think it’s plain to see from our conference overview that our group’s motivation and values are around, “one size does not fit all”, in mental health, just as in physical health. So, in order to make a difference to “status quo”, we want to get new evidence and research “out there”.
We don’t want to argue about the “medical model” and the “social model”, but to get new research looked at and listened to by more people and in this way lobby to improve medications, treatments and also social and personal support and services for our loved ones and people with similar needs.
We don’t want arguments about “labelling” and diagnoses, just to have people hear what we are saying and to examine the science behind it and judge for themselves.
We don’t attack ideas we don’t agree with – just let them get on with it, whilst we look at research, treatments and services which make sense to us and may help some of our loved ones if we manage to persuade the funders and decision makers to give them a try and to make their efforts sustainable when they get results.
This way we also aim to improve services for people with severe, long term mental health conditions so they won’t be so severe or chronic. So many new treatments (and not-so-new treatments) are not being tried in our area – they say because of funding or staffing problems, but we believe that it is because they have not the will or conviction to make Stockport a model of good practice in the area of mental ill health.
In this week’s (May 9th) Stockport Express one of the letters said: YOUR VIEWS
“Stockport council must surely at this point have a far reaching reputation for having less interest in public opinion that a cat does in Neuroscience”.
To be fair, I think this can be said for all those responsible for services for people with severe mental health conditions in Stockport
Irene Harris-Group Co-Ordinator