Controversial professor to investigate overdiagnosis of mental health and neurodivergence for Labour

John Mac

John Mac

Senior Member (Voting Rights)

Controversial professor to investigate overdiagnosis of mental health and neurodivergence for Labour

Get the benefits you're entitled to: help with personal independence payment (PIP), universal credit (UC), employment and support allowance (ESA),disability living allowance (DLA). Claims, assessments, reviews, appeals.
www.benefitsandwork.co.uk www.benefitsandwork.co.uk

Labour is launching a review to decide whether some mental health and neurodivergence issues are being overdiagnosed. The Health Service Journal (HSJ) reports that a highly controversial figure will play a lead role.

The review has been ordered by Wes Streeting, secretary of state for health and social care.

According to HSJ (paywall) the chair of the review will be psychoanalyst and clinical psychologist Peter Fonagy.

The vice chair will be the hugely divisive academic Sir Simon Wessely, Professor of Psychological Medicine at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience, Kings College.

Back in 2011, the Times called Wessely “the most hated doctor in Britain”. He was widely regarded by people living with ME/CFS as having popularised the idea that ME/CFS is a primarily a psychological condition, rather than a physical health one.

Amongst other things, this made it much more difficult for people with debilitating ME/CFS to score points for physical health activities when applying for benefits.

As a result of his publications, Wessely says he was threatened and harassed to such an extent that he gave up his research and went to work for the military in Iraq and Afghanistan, where he claimed he felt safer.

So, it is more than a little surprising that Wessely has chosen to play such a prominent role in research that could be just as controversial as his work on ME/CFS.

Especially as there is a strong probability that many people will consider the outcome of the research a foregone conclusion, with the government heavily leaning in one direction.

Back in March, the minister behind this review told the BBC that there was an “overdiagnosis” of mental health conditions and that “there’s too many people being written off”. Streeting’s comments came in the context of Labour preparing to announce massive cuts to personal independence payment (PIP) which they were subsequently forced to drop, following a backbench revolt.

And yesterday, prime minister Keir Starmer told Radio 4 that:

“I think we need to look again at this issue of mental health and ask ourselves a fundamental question, which is: would we not be better putting our money in the resources and support that is needed for mental health than simply saying, it’s to be provided in benefits?”

“I’m not saying you shouldn’t have benefits for mental health issues, but I do think we need to examine this quite carefully. I have to say, I am particularly concerned about young people in this regard – there are about a million young people who are on benefits, not all for mental health issues, but quite a number for mental health issues.

“I think that is wrong, and I don’t just say that because of the spending implications. I say it because if you are on benefits in your twenties, it is going to be extremely difficult to get off benefits for the rest of your life. It is not good, and there’s a million young people in that position. So there’s a moral case for changing that, that I’m perfectly prepared to make.”

There can be little doubt, then, about the government’s attitude to levels of mental health diagnosis.

When Labour attempted to push through its cuts to PIP earlier this year, one of the criticisms made of ministers was that they failed to prepare the ground with backbenchers. Instead of doing their homework and creating well researched arguments for reducing the number of awards, they simply stated that there was a need to find savings.

So, it looks like ministers have now learnt their lesson and this review is part of an attempt to lay a medical and academic foundation for benefits cuts.

But, if that is the case, it seems astonishing that they have chosen Wessely to play such a public role, knowing his history with claimants. Unless, of course, Streeting has failed to do his homework yet again.
 
Nah. No one is capable of this much influence on their own. He's popular because he's promoting a perspective that is so popular in itself it doesn't need to be sold. It's systems that do things like this, and here it's plainly stated as being the position of the government, which simply hires people who will happily promote the narrative. But the narrative is so popular that anyone could take the role, those two matter as much to the outcome as empty chairs. It takes someone without a conscience to do it, but it's not as if there aren't hundreds who would gladly take his place and do the same.

It's just incredible how absurdly incoherent and dishonest the whole narrative is, and that's how you know it's 100% political. Real mental illness is actually severely underdiagnosed, because resources are totally insufficient, while likely a majority of what is diagnosed as mental health is mostly health problems or general unhappiness from a life that doesn't feel fulfilling in a society that only sees value in people as mindless labor and consumers. All of which will be aggravated by this "let them hang" approach, which is already the system the UK has adopted, and this is literally why mental illness is overdiagnosed: because it's an exception from most resources and forms of support.

So you have here a system that systematically miscategorized problems, then, seeing the predictable fake increase in that problem, simply kicks the cans, and millions of people, down the ditch.

One important detail here is how it mirrors what is going on in the US, where the entire health care industry is in shambles, especially around neurodivergence and autism. How it's all over-diagnosed, and would best be handled with.... diet, mindfulness and exercise. An idea that is very popular in the conspiracy fantasy communities, mostly because it overlaps with eugenics.

About the only difference with Lysenkoism is that Soviet leaders also had to eat and so when famine was the outcome they put a stop to it. Also it would have killed the entire population. But we are relatively small enough that it doesn't bother them. What's absurd is that solving chronic illness would boost GDP and economic activity more than the vast majority of fiscal and economic policy, but they prefer instead to lower it because it's so easy to punch down on vulnerable people they can't think of any other thing to do.
 
John Mac said:
The review has been ordered by Wes Streeting, secretary of state for health and social care.
Click to expand...
Bigger irony, this was put forward by our 'new champion' Jeremy Hunt in August

Young people being ‘overdiagnosed’ with mental ill health – Hunt​

The former health secretary argued that society has ‘lost sight of the fundamental reality that child development is a messy and uneven process’.​

Young people are being overdiagnosed with mental health conditions, Sir Jeremy Hunt has said, as he backed calls to radically reform the Send system.

The former health secretary argued that society has “lost sight of the fundamental reality that child development is a messy and uneven process”, in the foreword of a Policy Exchange report.

The report titled Out of Control argues that definitions of mental ill health and neurodivergence have been socially expanded, leading to overwhelm in the system.
Click to expand...
www.independent.co.uk

Young people being ‘overdiagnosed’ with mental ill health – Hunt

The former health secretary argued that society has ‘lost sight of the fundamental reality that child development is a messy and uneven process’.
www.independent.co.uk www.independent.co.uk
 
Just like I fear the eye of my local NHS as they have the ability to do a lot of harm, I am now feeling increasing fear about what government is going to do to us. State violence feels highly likely and many of us are barely surviving on minimal disability income as is without medical care.

There is a certain amount of irony that Wessely having helped create all this over diagnosis of mental health diseases, for physical conditions, is now part of the force to call even those diagnoses fake. In the middle of a giant problem where Long Covid is being misdiagnosed and failed to be counted by the NHS and I just feel there is no chance they recognise the reality of this situation. A lot of fear about what is going on right now.
 
Re Wessely and Jeremy Hunt, worth remembering this, when there was opposition when Wessely was appointed to head up the independent review into the Mental Health act (Theresa May was PM and JH was Health Secretary).
He (JH) wrote a letter saying
"The Prime Minister has asked Professor Wessely to lead an independent review of the Act because he is one of the most widely respected and experienced leaders this country has in the field of mental health."

"On the subject of the management of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) and the PACE trial, which examined the benefits of certain treatments, including graded exercise therapy, I do understand that this is an illness that can have a serious impact on people's health and wellbeing.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) exists to evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of medical interventions. NICE has long supported the therapeutic approaches that Professor Wessely is associated with. On 20 September, NICE announced plans to undertake a full review of its CFS/ME guidance, including around the evidence for treatment approaches such as graded exercise therapy, to ensure its advice reflects the latest available evidence. The NICE Guideline Committee that will be assembled to develop the guidance will include people with the condition and their carers, the healthcare professionals who treat them, and the organisations that commission the treatment."

Reply to our joint letter asking the Prime Minister to reconsider her decision to appoint Simon Wessely to lead the independent review into the Mental Health Act

We have now received a letter in response to our concerns from the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt. As requested by the Secretary of State we are sharing this letter with all co-signatories. We will be monitoring how the review takes place and supporting Deaf and Disabled People’s...
www.inclusionlondon.org.uk

eta: I'm hoping that JH is now aware of the harm that Wesselys 'therapeutic approaches' have done.
 
Sly Saint said:
Re Wessely and Jeremy Hunt, worth remembering this, when there was opposition when Wessely was appointed to head up the independent review into the Mental Health act (Theresa May was PM and JH was Health Secretary).
He (JH) wrote a letter saying
"The Prime Minister has asked Professor Wessely to lead an independent review of the Act because he is one of the most widely respected and experienced leaders this country has in the field of mental health."

"On the subject of the management of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME) and the PACE trial, which examined the benefits of certain treatments, including graded exercise therapy, I do understand that this is an illness that can have a serious impact on people's health and wellbeing.

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) exists to evaluate the efficacy and cost effectiveness of medical interventions. NICE has long supported the therapeutic approaches that Professor Wessely is associated with. On 20 September, NICE announced plans to undertake a full review of its CFS/ME guidance, including around the evidence for treatment approaches such as graded exercise therapy, to ensure its advice reflects the latest available evidence. The NICE Guideline Committee that will be assembled to develop the guidance will include people with the condition and their carers, the healthcare professionals who treat them, and the organisations that commission the treatment."

Reply to our joint letter asking the Prime Minister to reconsider her decision to appoint Simon Wessely to lead the independent review into the Mental Health Act

We have now received a letter in response to our concerns from the Secretary of State for Health, Jeremy Hunt. As requested by the Secretary of State we are sharing this letter with all co-signatories. We will be monitoring how the review takes place and supporting Deaf and Disabled People’s...
www.inclusionlondon.org.uk

eta: I'm hoping that JH is now aware of the harm that Wesselys 'therapeutic approaches' have done.
Click to expand...
Yes if A4ME have not vetted whether Hunt still holds these views they are risking inviting a fox into the henhouse. Look at what BACME entryism has done to the MEA
 
I felt furious when I heard this news on Thursday.

Wessely may be a product of a corrupt and uncaring system but his constant elevation is proof that the grave injustices we have been done are not taken seriously.

SW: these sick people people have mental health issues and therefore shouldn't get benefits because it will encourage them.
SW: We should respect people with mental health issues and give them the care they need.
SW: There are too many people being diagnosed with mental health issues.
SW: People with mental health issues shouldn't have benefits cos it will encourage them.

Make it make sense....
 
V.R.T. said:
Wessely may be a product of a corrupt and uncaring system but his constant elevation is proof that the grave injustices we have been done are not taken seriously.
Click to expand...
That's really the important part. HE is not important. He is elevated by a system, by people who love his bullshit. No person can do any of this on their own, he is popular in the profession because of his awful work, not despite it. It is the system that is in failure for elevating people like him, who in a healthy functioning medical profession would be a nobody, or frankly would simply have done other things because his awful ideas would be perceived as in the same category as homeopathy and phrenology.

Quite similar to how someone like RFK Jr ended up in his position, except IMO it is even worse seeing someone like Wessely elevated and respected by his peers, whereas RFK is a total fringe figure with almost zero respect from professionals.
 
Hoopoe said:
Wessely is the person that will do the dirty work of stigmatizing, marginalizing, downplaying and denying for the people in power. So the hate falls on him, and not the people in power.
Click to expand...
Yep. He is giving the people in political and economic power something they desperately want: pseudo-scientific, pseudo-medical, pseudo-compassionate excuses for their shitty policies and decisions.
 
Snow Leopard said:
It's not the only board he's on, it seems like a pattern of going against patient experience and needs.

transsafety.network

Simon Wessely’s history of discrediting sick and disabled people could be bad news for trans health research priorities.

Psychiatrist Simon Wessely has been appointed to chair the National Children and Young People’s Gender Dysphoria Research Oversight Board. TSN outline our concerns about this appointment.
transsafety.network transsafety.network
Click to expand...
The venn diagram of the psychiatrists pathologising, stigmatising, and making life worse for gender queer and trans people has a very large intersection with those on the whole psychobehavioural/psychosomatic everything we can’t explain is functional brigade.
 
Yann04 said:
The venn diagram of the psychiatrists pathologising, stigmatising, and making life worse for gender queer and trans people has a very large intersection with those on the whole psychobehavioural/psychosomatic everything we can’t explain is functional brigade.
Click to expand...
If only everyone was a white, middle-class, educated, able-bodied, heterosexual Man, preferably middle aged.
 
V.R.T. said:
Yes if A4ME have not vetted whether Hunt still holds these views they are risking inviting a fox into the henhouse.
Click to expand...
What politicians say is sometimes different to what they think. They have to do whatever's necessary in the situation, including coming out and supporting prime ministers, chancellors and other ministers of state who're plainly unfit for the job. It's just the game.

If Jeremy Hunt wants to support AfME's work, he could do it as well as anyone. There might be one or two strategic levers he could pull that the charity can't: a bit of lobbying of key individuals or sitting on a parliamentary committee to represent what AfME is doing.

It's entirely possible for a politician to do good work on (say) raising awareness and enthusiasm for projects like SequenceME/LC, while simultaneously agreeing with people in their party who think benefits for disabled people are too generous. It's the first bit that matters; the second seems to be a cross party view anyway, so one more supporter of it doesn't make much difference.
 
Kitty said:
What politicians say is sometimes different to what they think. They have to do whatever's necessary in the situation, including coming out and supporting prime ministers, chancellors and other ministers of state who're plainly unfit for the job. It's just the game.

If Jeremy Hunt wants to support AfME's work, he could do it as well as anyone. There might be one or two strategic levers he could pull that the charity can't: a bit of lobbying of key individuals or sitting on a parliamentary committee to represent what AfME is doing.

It's entirely possible for a politician to do good work on (say) raising awareness and enthusiasm for projects like SequenceME/LC, while simultaneously agreeing with people in their party who think benefits for disabled people are too generous. It's the first bit that matters; the second seems to be a cross party view anyway, so one more supporter of it doesn't make much difference.
Click to expand...
I get your point in general terms but I don't believe that Jeremy Hunt could be an effective advocate for SequenceME, or anything else that we need, if he still thinks that GET and CBT are appropriate treatments that help pwME and the sun shines out of Simon Wessely's arse.
 
V.R.T. said:
if he still thinks that GET and CBT are appropriate treatments that help pwME and the sun shines out of Simon Wessely's arse.
Click to expand...

We don't know much about what any of them think. Senior politicians have to stick to their party's script whether they agree with it or not, otherwise they don't get to be senior politicians.

And making progress on ME/CFS this isn't a party political issue. The conversation is nothing to do with welfare, for instance (if it were I might share more of your doubts), it's about making progress on unpicking the cause of a disease that severely affects the life chances of young people. Very few politicians would have a problem getting behind that, especially now DecodeME has shown there are probably answers to be found in genetics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom