Citation

Seager M. Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy 2006; 20(4): 266-280.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2006, Association for Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy in the National Health Service)

DOI

10.1080/02668730601020291

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

It is not controversial to say that we live in an era of unprecedented preoccupation with the notion of 'risk' in our public mental health services, not to mention other areas of public life. Notions of 'risk' and 'safety have long been at the heart of current government policy on mental health as epitomized by the guidance document entitled Modernising Mental Health Services: Safe, Sound & Supportive (Department of Health [DoH] 1998). This is partly a consequence of the continuing switch of emphasis by both major political parties over the last 20 years or more away from hospital or in-patient care and towards community-based services. This is not the place, however, to focus on the political context. However, in clinical terms what really is the difference between a 'safe' or 'secure' mental health service and an 'unsafe' or 'insecure' one? The more I have been invited to think about this question, the more complex and unfamiliar the territory has revealed itself to be.

Language: en

Keywords

government; suicide; safety; psychotherapy; public health; risk assessment; community; article; politics; psychoanalysis; health care policy; patient care; priority journal; mental health service; medical decision making; national health service; mental patient; hospital patient; hospital discharge; psychoanalytic theory