Jeanette Hewitt

Elite gymnastics, and other sports where athletes and coaches are particularly concerned with aesthetic considerations, weight and shape, are fields within which the risk of eating disorders may be unusually high. Adolescent gymnasts, developing their own sense of self, at a time of life where body image concerns are common, often compete at the very top of the sport with a need to maintain a body shape and weight optimal for elite performance. Research into this field should address the range of sociological and ethical aspects of eating disorders in elite sport, their prevalence as well as the ethos of the sport itself. This paper addresses a range of conceptual, ethical and methodological issues relevant to conducting research in this sensitive yet important field.

It was reported in 2006 that a regime of ‘supervised self harm’ had been implemented at St George’s Hospital, Stafford. This involves patients with a history of self-harming behaviour being offered both emotional and practical support to enable them to do so. This support can extend to the provision of knives or razors to enable them to self-harm while they are being supervised by a nurse. This article discusses, and evaluates from an ethical perspective, three competing responses to self-harming behaviours: to prevent it; to allow it; and to make provision for supervised self-harm. It is argued that of these three options the prevention strategy is the least plausible. A tentative conclusion is offered in support of supervised self-harm.

A diagnosis of schizophrenia is often taken to denote a state of global irrationality within the psychiatric paradigm, wherein psychotic phenomena are seen to equate with a lack of mental capacity. However, the little research that has been undertaken on mental capacity in psychiatric patients shows that people with schizophrenia are more likely to experience isolated, rather than constitutive, irrationality and are therefore not necessarily globally incapacitated. Rational suicide has not been accepted as a valid choice for people with schizophrenia due in part to a belief that characteristic irrationality prevents autonomous decision-making. Since people with schizophrenia are often seen to lack insight into the nature of their disorder, both psychiatric and ethical perspectives generally presume that suicidal acts result directly from mental illness itself and not from second-order desires. In this article, I challenge notions of global irrationality conferred by a diagnosis of schizophrenia and argue that, where delusional beliefs are unifocal, schizophrenia does not necessarily lead to a state of mental incapacity. I then attempt to show that people with schizophrenia can sometimes be rational with regard to suicide, where this decision stems from a realistic appraisal of psychological suffering.

ABSTRACT:  Evidence‐based practice (EBP) has become a dominant epistemology in nursing education, and has devalued the complex interpersonal components of mental health nursing. A curriculum for mental health nursing, which values the personhood of service users, should focus on those processes that promote recovery within a therapeutic relationship committed to collaboration and respect for diversity. These relationships become possible where the preparation of mental health nurses for practice includes an examination of self in terms of beliefs and values and their consequences on others. The combination of action and reflection in praxis provides a means by which self‐examination and professional obligation can be examined in order to construct a moral identity, which is responsive to the needs of people with mental health problems. Praxis is more than a means of reflecting on practice: it draws together skill, practice knowledge, attitudinal style, and moral reasoning. For this reason, ethical values have a vital role to play in the development of contemporary nursing praxis.

Suicide prevention is a National Health Service priority in the United Kingdom. People with mental illness are seen to represent one of the most vulnerable groups for suicide and recent British Government policy has focused on prevention and management of perceived risk. This approach to suicide prevention is constructed under a biomedical model of psychiatry, which maintains that suicidal persons suffer from some form of disease or irrational drive towards self-destruction. Many react to the idea of self-inflicted death with instinctive revulsion, which has prevented serious discussion of the concept of rational suicide, particularly in relation to those with schizophrenia. The idea that there may be circumstances in which suicide can be viewed as rational is discussed within the biomedical approach to ethics and wider literature primarily in relation to physical disease, terminal states and chronic pain. It is not deemed a viable choice for those who are considered ‘non-autonomous’ due to the controlling forces of mental illness. I propose that suicide is not a consequence of mental illness per se, and that it may be seen as a rational response to a realistic perspective on the course and consequences of living with schizophrenia. The denial of dialogue about the validity of suicidal ideation for people with schizophrenia has led to negative consequences for people with serious mental illness in terms of justice and recognition of person-hood.

Aims and objectives.  To explore service user and community mental health nurses views on responses to voice hearing experiences.Background.  People who hear distressing auditory hallucinations (voices) are often in contact with mental health services. Nursing responses to this experience have been limited, although emerging evidence suggests some utilitarian alternative interventions, such as discussing the content and meaning of the voices.Design.  Using exploratory interviews, this study investigated the response to voice hearing, with a purposive sample of community mental health nurses (n = 20) and service users (n = 20). This paper reports on a thematic content analysis of transcribed interviews, which highlighted differences in perspectives of voice hearers and the nurses supporting them.Results.  Voice hearers reported that interventions from community mental health nurses were limited to reviews of medication, access to the psychiatrist and non‐directive counselling. They identified alternative needs, which involved talking more about the content and meaning of their voices. Conversely, community mental health nurses regarded their responses to voice hearing as being considered, titrated and demonstrating an awareness of the personal contexts of service users. These responses were however restricted by their perception of skill limitations.Conclusions.  The contrasting views of nurses and users of services demonstrated in this study, reveal multiple social realities that represent a challenge to accepted professional responses in the provision of mental health care.Relevance to practice.  People who hear voices express an interest in more helpful responses from community mental health nurses. The findings of this study indicate that nurses must begin to orientate themselves towards a more critical practice stance that encompasses available knowledge on the voice hearing experience.

Mental health policy development in the UK has become increasingly dominated by the assumed need to prevent violence and alleviate public concerns about the dangers of the mentally ill living in the community. Risk management has become the expected focus of contemporary mental health services, and responsibility has increasingly been devolved to individual service professionals when systems fail to prevent violence. This paper analyses the development of mental health legislation and its impact on services users and mental health professionals at the micro level of service delivery. Historical precedence, media influence and public opinion are explored, and the reification of risk is questioned in practical and ethical terms. The government's newest proposals for compulsory treatment in the community are discussed in terms of practical efficacy and therapeutic impact. Dangerousness is far from being an objectively observable phenomenon arising from clinical pathology, but is a formulation of what is partially knowable through social analysis and unknowable by virtue of its situation in individual psychic motivation. Risk assessment can therefore never be completely accurate, and the solution of a ‘better safe than sorry’ approach to mental health policy is ethically and pragmatically flawed.