1. Sign our petition calling on Cochrane to withdraw their review of Exercise Therapy for CFS here.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Guest, the 'News in Brief' for the week beginning 18th September 2023 is here.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Welcome! To read the Core Purpose and Values of our forum, click here.
    Dismiss Notice

Law Society calls for stronger safeguards to protect detained patients

Discussion in 'Other health news and research' started by hinterland, Feb 1, 2018.

  1. hinterland

    hinterland Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Wessely watch:

    The Law Society Gazette: Society calls for stronger safeguards to protect detained patients

    "Last year the government appointed professor Simon Wessely, a former president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, to chair an independent review of the Mental Health Act, looking at the legislation's impact on 'service users', families and staff. Wessely will publish an interim report followed by a final version with detailed recommendations by autumn this year."
  2. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    Irony of ironies. I hope the allegations following the Gresham College GWS lecture were declared as a COI. Whether the allegations were true or false they would still represent a COI.
    Wonko and Invisible Woman like this.
  3. Sean

    Sean Moderator Staff Member


    Valentijn, Trish, chrisb and 2 others like this.
  4. Arnie Pye

    Arnie Pye Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    What allegations and what lecture? I obviously missed this.
  5. chrisb

    chrisb Senior Member (Voting Rights)

    In 2006 SW gave a lecture on GWS at Gresham College London. This was interrupted by protestors. One of the leaders alleged that her computer had been hacked by authorities. She was subsequently arrested and sectioned, being held in conditions she considered inappropriate. She complained that she was forced to miss her mother's funeral. She alleged that she was later released, without any change in her mental condition having occurred. She believed the "security" around SW to be implicated.

    Only the most extreme would consider SW to be personally implicated. There does however remain a possibility that there was abnormal involvement of others responsible for the policing of SWs security.

    The truth or falsity of the more extreme claims is not important. What is important for these purposes is that SW was personally subject to claims which may have coloured his judgment about the issues which he seems to have been tasked with investigating. His decision and recommendations should be based upon the evidence which he takes, not upon personal experience. It would be perfectly reasonable for him to be a witness to such an enquiry and contribute evidence. It seems unusual that he should be invited to lead the enquiry.

    EDIT These seem to be the claims though I am sure that I have seen them more closely associated with the protest. http://starkravingviking.blogspot.co.uk/2006/08/lisa-masterson-of-uk-victim-of.html
    I do not wish to start a discussion on this subject here, this is all long ago, but there is no harm in reminding SW of the events should his enquiry wish to consider them.
    Last edited: Feb 2, 2018

Share This Page