New Ways of Working threatens the future of the psychiatric profession

Abstract

We were interested to read the article by Dinniss et al (Psychiatric Bulletin, March 2007, 31, 107-109) on qualifications in clinical education for psychiatrists. We wish to draw attention to postgraduate programmes in medical education (including MSc, PGDip and PGCert) run by Durham University, which did not feature in the list. These are particularly relevant in that Dinniss et al identify a number of deficiencies in the course they undertook: some modules only had marginal relevance to their needs, and they would have valued greater opportunities to develop practical skills in delivering teaching and supporting learning. Our programmes have a strong bias towards practical approaches as opposed to being focused on research, although of course good teaching practice is also research informed. Details of our courses are available from the Durham University website at

Are psychiatrists an endangered species? Observations on internal and external challenges to the profession

“…This proposal creates a dilemma, expressed tellingly by an English psychiatrist as follows: “Psychiatrists must continue to see patients, also in the first line and not just as supervisor. If we, as consultant body, see a small number of cases, while supervising others who are seeing vastly more people than ourselves, it is only a matter of time before we lose respect, credibility and competence” 87.…”

Wake-up call for British psychiatry

“…16–19 However, we should not assume that this pragmatic emergency ‘solution’ is an ideal, or even desirable, state of affairs. 20 Although distributed responsibility may make life easier for psychiatrists and appears to be the cheaper option, it does not follow that this is in the best interests of patients. Should we not be arguing for better evidence-based services and the resources and workforce to deliver these services?…”

Two consultants for one patient: service users' and service providers' views on ‘New Ways’

“…Similar views have been expressed elsewhere previously. 11 There are concerns that this discontinuity may be another hole in the net through which some patients may slip. It can be argued that ensuring continuity of care was already a challenge (even before this change was implemented) in the era of multiple teams such as CMHTs, assertive outreach teams, crisis teams, and early intervention in psychosis teams, so this new model may not actually pose additional new problems.…”