The purpose of this Consensus Statement is to provide a global, collaborative, representative and inclusive vision for educating an interprofessional healthcare workforce that can deliver sustainable healthcare and promote planetary health. It is intended to inform national and global accreditation standards, planning and action at the institutional level as well as highlight the role of individuals in transforming health professions education. Many countries have agreed to 'rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes' to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 45% within 10 years and achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, including in healthcare. Currently, however, health professions graduates are not prepared for their roles in achieving these changes. Thus, to reduce emissions and meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), health professions education must equip undergraduates, and those already qualified, with the knowledge, skills, values, competence and confidence they need to sustainably promote the health, human rights and well-being of current and future generations, while protecting the health of the planet. The current imperative for action on environmental issues such as climate change requires health professionals to mobilize politically as they have before, becoming strong advocates for major environmental, social and economic change. A truly ethical relationship with people and the planet that we inhabit so precariously, and to guarantee a future for the generations which follow, demands nothing less of all health professionals. This Consensus Statement outlines the changes required in health professions education, approaches to achieve these changes and a timeline for action linked to the internationally agreed SDGs. It represents the collective vision of health professionals, educators and students from various health professions, geographic locations and cultures. 'Consensus' implies broad agreement amongst all individuals engaged in discussion on a specific issue, which in this instance, is agreement by all signatories of this Statement developed under the auspices of the Association for Medical Education in Europe (AMEE). To ensure a shared understanding and to accurately convey information, we outline key terms in a glossary which accompanies this Consensus Statement (Supplementary Appendix 1). We acknowledge, however, that terms evolve and that different terms resonate variably depending on factors such as setting and audience. We define education for sustainable healthcare as the process of equipping current and

In this paper we explore some current issues in, what has come to be called, the new sociology of childhood and how these relate to the process of researching children's lives in general, and to our own research in particular. We discuss the developmental model of childhood, before going on to explore ideas about children as, on the one hand, inhabiting a relatively autonomous realm and, on the other as part of the same social world as adults but with different sets of competencies. The implications of these differing positions for researching children will be assessed prior to a discussion of the design of our current research, on children and risk, and the wider implications of our reflections on the research process.

The article explores the experiences of parents living with a young person with mental health problems. Qualitative interviews were conducted with 25 parents (18 mothers and 7 fathers) whose child had a diagnosed psychiatric condition. It is argued that the parents engaged in a form of narrative reconstruction of their dual roles as parents and carers as they tried to make sense of the illness in their lives by reconstructing their past, present and future experiences. The concept ‘responsibility’ was threaded through the parents’ narratives and is discussed in relation to three key dimensions – moral responsibility; causal responsibility; and responsibility for self. It is argued that the moral imperative to care for their child was the dominant theme in the parents’ narratives but that this was challenged by their lack of knowledge of psychiatric conditions; their interactions with healthcare professionals; their relationships with their child; and their difficulties in coping with the extended parental responsibility that arose from their caring role.

No abstract

Aim and objectiveThe aim of this study was to describe and explore parents' information and support needs when their child is diagnosed with type 1 diabetes, including their views about the timing and chronology of current support provision. Our objective was to identify ways in which parents could be better supported in the future.Design and participantsSemi‐structured interviews were conducted with 54 parents of children with type 1 diabetes in four paediatric diabetes clinics in Scotland. Data were analysed using an inductive, thematic approach.FindingsParents described needing more reassurance after their child was diagnosed before being given complex information about diabetes management, so they would be better placed psychologically and emotionally to absorb this information. Parents also highlighted a need for more emotional and practical support from health professionals when they first began to implement diabetes regimens at home, tailored to their personal and domestic circumstances. However, some felt unable to ask for help or believed that health professionals were unable to offer empathetic support. Whilst some parents highlighted a need for support delivered by peer parents, others who had received peer support conveyed ambivalent views about the input and advice they had received.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that professionals should consider the timing and chronology of support provision to ensure that parents' emotional and informational needs are addressed when their child is diagnosed and that practical advice and further emotional support are provided thereafter, which takes account of their day‐to‐day experiences of caring for their child.

This article presents an analysis of the family context and everyday negotiations around risk, safety and danger between children and parents in four families drawn from a larger qualitative study. The challenges of analysing accounts from several family members are highlighted. Case study families are described; and fragments of their interwoven individual and shared biographies, on which respondents regularly drew to legitimate risk-related beliefs and practices, are outlined. The dynamic, fluid and contingent nature of risk construction and reconstruction in everyday family life is discussed and three main themes explored: establishing ‘the bottom line’; assumptions, collusions and contradictions around age, siblinghood and time; and contextualizing risk in the conduct of others. The authors conclude that, just as with childhood itself, it is important also to contextualize ‘risk’ within socioeconomic, cultural and institutional frameworks; and that, for most children, their families both constitute one such context and mediate wider social structures.

ObjectiveTo explore the experiences of women in Scotland who return home to complete medical termination of pregnancy (TOP) ≤63 days of gestation, after being administered with mifepristone and misoprostol at an NHS TOP clinic.DesignQualitative interview study.SettingOne National Health Service health board (administrative) area in Scotland.Population or SampleWomen in Scotland who had undergone medical TOP ≤63 days, and self‐managed passing the pregnancy at home; recruited from three clinics in one NHS health board area between January and July 2014.MethodsIn‐depth, semi‐structured interviews with 44 women in Scotland who had recently undergone TOP ≤63 days of gestation, and who returned home to pass the pregnancy. Data were analysed thematically using an approach informed by the Framework method.Main outcome measuresWomen's experiences of self‐management of TOP ≤63 days of gestation.ResultsKey themes emerging from the analysis related to self‐administration of misoprostol in clinic; reasons for choosing home self‐management; facilitation of self‐management and expectation‐setting; experiences of getting home; self‐managing and monitoring treatment progress; support for self‐management (in person and remotely); and pregnancy self‐testing to confirm completion.ConclusionsParticipants primarily found self‐administration of misoprostol and home self‐management to be acceptable and/or preferable, particularly where this was experienced as a decision made jointly with health professionals. The way in which home self‐management is presented to women at clinic requires ongoing attention. Women could benefit from the option of home administration of misoprostol.Tweetable abstractWomen undergoing medical TOP 63 days found home self‐management to be acceptable and/or preferable.

Background: Limited attention has been paid to adolescents and young adults' (AYA's) experiences in the aftermath of a cancer diagnosis, despite this being a time when potentially life-changing decisions are made. We explored AYA's and caregivers' experiences of, and views about, making treatment and trial participation decisions following a cancer diagnosis, in order to understand, and help facilitate, informed treatment decision-making in this age group. Methods: Interviews were undertaken with 18 AYA diagnosed, or re-diagnosed, with cancer when aged 16-24 years, and 15 parents/caregivers. Analysis focused on the identification and description of explanatory themes. Results: Most AYA described being extremely unwell by the time of diagnosis and, consequently, experiencing difficulties processing the news. Distress and acceleration in clinical activity following diagnosis could further impede the absorption of treatment-relevant information. After referral to a specialist cancer unit, many AYA described quickly transitioning to a calm and pragmatic mind-set, and wanting to commence treatment at the earliest opportunity. Most reported seeing information about short-term side-effects of treatment as having limited relevance to their recovery-focused outlook at that time. AYA seldom indicated wanting to make choices about front-line treatment, with most preferring to defer decisions to health professionals. Even when charged with decisions about trial participation, AYA reported welcoming a strong health professional steer. Parents/caregivers attempted to compensate for AYA's limited engagement with treatment-relevant information. However, in seeking to ensure AYA received the best treatment, these individuals had conflicting priorities and information needs.