Being Mindful About Mindfulness: Exploring the Dark Side

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-28
Author(s):  
Sue Parker Hall

In this paper, I acknowledge the rising popularity of mindfulness and analyze research into its positive, and less-researched negative, outcomes. I examine concerns about the training, quality, and supervision of mindfulness teachers. I address the roots of mindfulness in Buddhism and the consequences of its secularization, reduction, and commercialization. I argue that the mindfulness intervention works well as a standalone modality, predominantly as a means to manage symptoms and with relatively well clients, but that it is contraindicated with those who have experienced significant life or developmental trauma. I discuss the potential for the abuse of mindfulness in terms of its use in military conflict, recruitment of people into cults, and the purpose of influencing people to accept and tolerate oppressive environments. I make a case for combining psychotherapy and psychoeducation with mindfulness to create a safer and more effective therapeutic process that can support clients, including former members, with more complex trauma issues. Being Mindful About Mindfulness: Exploring the Dark Side There is currently great enthusiasm in the United Kingdom for mindfulness, a psychological intervention garnered from Buddhism, and numerous applications are being rolled out by the state and private enterprises. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommends mindfulness, and it is the focus of a Mindfulness All-Party Parliamentary Group (MAPPG) and the subject of a major parliamentary report, The Mindfulness Initiative (2015). This alliance reported having been “impressed by the quality and range of evidence for the benefits of mindfulness and believe it has the potential to help many people to better health and flourishing” (MAPPG, 2015, p. 4) and is advocating mindfulness as a cost-effective route to tackling the country’s mental health crisis (MAPPG, 2015).

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Opeyemi Odejimi ◽  
Dhruba Bagchi ◽  
George Tadros

Abstract Background Mental health crisis requiring emergency access to psychiatric service can occur at any time. Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) is described as one that provides an immediate response to an individual in crisis within the first 24 h. Presently, several types of PESs are available in the United Kingdom (UK) with the aim of providing prompt and effective assessment and management of patients. Therefore, this study aims to provide a detailed narrative literature review of the various types of Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) currently available in the UK. Method Electronic search of five key databases (MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, AMED and PUBMED) was conducted. Studies were included if it described a mental health service in the UK that provides immediate response in mental health crisis within the first 24 h. Excluded studies did not describe a PES, non-English, and were not conducted in UK. Results Nine types of PESs were found. Amongst the 9 services, more papers described crisis resolution home treatment. Majority of the papers reported services within England than other countries within the UK. Conclusion All types of PESs were described as beneficial, particularly to mental health service users, but not without some shortcomings. There is a need to continue carrying out methodological research that evaluate impact, cost-effectiveness as well as identify methods of optimising the beneficial outcomes of the various types of PESs. This may help inform researchers, policy makers and commissioners, service users and carers, service providers and many more on how to ensure current and future PESs meet the needs as well as aid recovery during crisis.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Opeyemi Odejimi ◽  
Dhruba Bagchi ◽  
George Tadros

Abstract Background Mental health crisis requiring emergency access to psychiatric service can occur at any time. Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) is described as one that provides an immediate response to an individual in crisis within the first 24 hours. Presently, several PESs are available in the United Kingdom (UK) with the aim of providing prompt and effective assessment, management and in some cases treatment and/or referral. Therefore, this study aims to provide a detailed narrative literature review of Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) currently available in the UK Method Electronic search of five key databases (MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, AMED and PUBMED) was conducted. Studies were included if it described a service that provides immediate response in mental health crisis within the first 24 hours. Excluded studies did not describe a PES, non-English, and were not conducted in UK. Results Nine PESs were found. Amongst the 9 services, more papers described crisis resolution home treatment. Majority of the papers reported services within England than other countries within the UK. Conclusion All forms of PES are beneficial, particularly to mental health service users, but not without some shortcomings. There is a need to continue carrying out methodological research that evaluate impact, cost-effectiveness as well as identify methods of optimising the beneficial outcomes of all models of PES. This may help inform researchers, policy makers and commissioners, service users and carers, service providers and many more on how to ensure current and future PES meet the needs as well as aid recovery during crisis.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Opeyemi Odejimi ◽  
Dhruba Bagchi ◽  
George Tadros

Abstract Background: Mental health crisis requiring emergency access to psychiatric service can occur at any time. Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) is described as one that provides an immediate response to an individual in crisis within the first 24 hours. Presently, several types of PESs are available in the United Kingdom (UK) with the aim of providing prompt and effective assessment and management of patients. Therefore, this study aims to provide a detailed narrative literature review of the various types of Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) currently available in the UKMethod: Electronic search of five key databases (MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, AMED and PUBMED) was conducted. Studies were included if it described a mental health service in the UK that provides immediate response in mental health crisis within the first 24 hours. Excluded studies did not describe a PES, non-English, and were not conducted in UK. Results: Nine types of PESs were found. Amongst the 9 services, more papers described crisis resolution home treatment. Majority of the papers reported services within England than other countries within the UK. Conclusion: All types of PESs were described as beneficial, particularly to mental health service users, but not without some shortcomings. There is a need to continue carrying out methodological research that evaluate impact, cost-effectiveness as well as identify methods of optimising the beneficial outcomes of the various types of PESs. This may help inform researchers, policy makers and commissioners, service users and carers, service providers and many more on how to ensure current and future PESs meet the needs as well as aid recovery during crisis.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Opeyemi Odejimi ◽  
Dhruba Bagchi ◽  
George Tadros

Abstract Background: Mental health crisis requiring emergency access to psychiatric service can occur at any time. Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) is described as one that provides an immediate response to an individual in crisis within the first 24 hours. Presently, several types of PESs are available in the United Kingdom (UK) with the aim of providing prompt and effective assessment and management of patients. Therefore, this study aims to provide a detailed narrative literature review of the various types of Psychiatric Emergency Service (PES) currently available in the UKMethod: Electronic search of five key databases (MEDLINE, PsychINFO, EMBASE, AMED and PUBMED) was conducted. Studies were included if it described a mental health service in the UK that provides immediate response in mental health crisis within the first 24 hours. Excluded studies did not describe a PES, non-English, and were not conducted in UK. Results: Nine types of PESs were found. Amongst the 9 services, more papers described crisis resolution home treatment. Majority of the papers reported services within England than other countries within the UK. Conclusion: All types of PESs were described as beneficial, particularly to mental health service users, but not without some shortcomings. There is a need to continue carrying out methodological research that evaluate impact, cost-effectiveness as well as identify methods of optimising the beneficial outcomes of the various types of PESs. This may help inform researchers, policy makers and commissioners, service users and carers, service providers and many more on how to ensure current and future PESs meet the needs as well as aid recovery during crisis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document