November 2021: Mental Health Funding in the UK. Who cares?
True to my word, I continue promoting one of my textbooks - Strategies and Self-help from Counselling and Psychotherapy available at Waterstones and Amazon amongst other outlets:
November 2021 article is going to cover Chapter 5 Access and Communication in Psychotherapeutic Professions.
I have selected a citation and discussed the extract with several of my colleagues. I am hoping that some formal answers will come forward by the end of the month.
There are several policies and actions that a private therapist (a general term including psychotherapist, counsellor, psychologist, psychiatrist, mental health worker, social worker if trained in a specific therapeutic modality, a nurse practicing and trained in mental health etc.) may and/or must consider when practicing in private practice if not associated to any other organisation ; and as such, I have formulated several questions and points of reference for my colleagues in private practice (independently of not being associated ) for all possible implications to their practice and their client's wellbeing.
Through my practice I am aware of a different way of working in private practice: in that of being completely independent and/or part of an independent private practice and networking. As much and as far such a statement is an absolute, there are ethical guidance for each individual professional through their education and an assimilation of legislation that can be applied in all instances.
The very fact is that a private practitioner within the UK is the sole responsible owner of their practice in reference to a private client. A private practitioner not only that is not bound to respond or collaborate with the NHS , but if (legally) challenged/invited/requested to do so - a private specialist can still refuse to respond unless it is evidenced that his/hers/theirclientsare involved in terrorist activity and/or present a risk to themselves and others. Essential to remark that respective private practioner can only respond only if they agree with presented evidence. If their interpretation of the case differs to evidence presented - than, a private practioner can opt for a non-response and ultimately they will not participate (there is no case).
One needs to read very carefully the above practice guidelines because are very serious implications in private practice and training required to assume such responsibilities. A private mental health specialist is not shielded by any organization, and they are not protected in any way BUT, equally, they do not respond to anyone except the law and only when there is an agreed stance on evidence against their clients and/or malpractice. There is no bias involved because when a private mental health expert sees risk* - that risk is also their risk and everyone will respond accordingly. It is fair to note, that there are insurance (professional and public safety liabilities) complexities for any professional, but such insurances strands are only active when: a) a private mental health practioner makes such assessments, b) professional makes an assessment, but clients act against it and, and as such, a private practitioner would respond legally as a matter of defence (potentially c). To have the ability and reason to act in all above possibilities, anyone (including the state) needs to have evidence, and by evidence I mean facts and not suppositions.
Human Rights Act 1998 and Equality Act 2010 are legislative Acts that can and will stand as Applicable in all instances and to all, hence any other authority or declared professional authority is rather absolutely non-sensical and has no merit against a stance of an individual practitioner when there is a disagreement. My Strategy named asV.A.L.I.D.A.T.E explains at great length all such implications. - link in its name.