Letter: Pioneers and victims of care in the community

Dr John D. Williamson
Tuesday 20 July 1993 23:02 BST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

Sir: More than a decade ago I predicted that the then new care in the community programme would come to grief as more people were discharged from mental asylums inappropriately. The Community Health Council, of which I was a member, heard my protests but could do nothing to counterbalance the polemic of civil liberties which pervaded policy decisions concerning the management of people with mental illness. The sad case of Christopher Clunis ('The tragic scandal of a schizophrenic killer nobody stopped', 19 July) is the latest proof of my assertion.

As a GP, I had two violent patients in the community whom I felt ought to be in secure units. One killed himself. The other assaulted me, and I have no doubt would have stabbed me had he had a knife to hand. My attempts to have him sent to a secure unit by the court were thwarted by the Crown Prosecution Service, which decided not to prosecute. Many GPs could tell similar tales.

Of course, the majority of mentally ill people are safe and can benefit from care within the community, but a minority of patients need the security, safety, withdrawal from society and space that the old-style asylums gave. We need modern units, by whatever name, which are large enough to allow patients to mingle with different groups of people as moods change yet small enough to be homely. This builds on the benefits of asylums without repeating their mistakes, and no amount of community care can do this. The opposite of a bad asylum is a good asylum, not a closed one.

Yours sincerely,

JOHN D. WILLIAMSON

Hove, Sussex

19 July

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in