Mental health deserves better: Resisting the dilution of specialist pre-registration mental health nurse education in the United Kingdom.

This article aims to draw attention to increasing genericism in nurse education in the United Kingdom, which sees less specialist mental health education for mental health nursing students and offers opposition to such direction. In 2018, the Nursing and Midwifery Council produced the 'Future Nurse' standards which directed changes to pre-registration nurse education. This led to dissatisfaction from many mental health nurses, specifically regarding reduced mental health content for students studying mental health nursing. Concerns have been raised through public forum and evolved into a grassroots national movement 'Mental Health Deserves Better' (#MHDeservesBetter). This is a position paper which presents the perspective of many mental health nurse academics working at universities within the United Kingdom. Mental health nurse academics collaborated to develop ideas and articulate arguments and perspectives which present a strong position on the requirement for specialist pre-registration mental health nurse education. The key themes explored are; a conflict of ideologies in nursing, no parity of esteem, physical health care needs to be contextualized, the unique nature of mental health nursing, ethical tensions and values conflict, implications for practice, necessary improvements overlooked and the dangers of honesty and academic 'freedom'. The paper concludes by asserting a strong position on the need for a change of direction away from genericism and calls on mental health nurses to rise from the ashes to advocate for a quality education necessary to ensure quality care delivery. The quality of mental health care provided by mental health nurses has many influences, yet the foundation offered through pre-registration education is one of the most valuable. If the education of mental health nurses does not attend to the distinct and unique role of the mental health nurse, standards of mental health care may diminish without assertive action from mental health nurses and allies.

Perspectives of crisis intervention for people diagnosed with "borderline personality disorder": An integrative review.

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: People diagnosed with "BPD" often experience crisis and use services "BPD" is a controversial diagnosis, and the experience of crisis and crisis intervention is not well understood WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: People diagnosed with "BPD" have different experiences of crisis, and using the diagnosis alone as a basis for deciding care and treatment is not appropriate There are many human factors which can influence how professionals deliver care to people diagnosed with "BPD" WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The education of staff, views on responsibility, team conflicts and access to clinical supervision can have an impact on how care is delivered, and should be addressed by organizations providing crisis care. Access to care often occurs when a person is self-harming or suicidal, but does not address underlying distress. Crisis care should go beyond managing behaviour and address any underlying needs. ABSTRACT: Introduction "Borderline personality disorder" ("BPD") is associated with frequent use of crisis intervention services. However, no robust evidence base supports specific interventions, and people's experiences are not well understood. Aim To explore the experiences of stakeholders involved in the crisis care of people diagnosed with "BPD." Method Integrative review with nine databases searched January 2000 to November 2017. The search filtered 3,169 titles and abstracts with 46 full-text articles appraised and included. Results Four themes were constructed from thematic analysis: crisis as a recurrent multidimensional cycle, variations and dynamics impacting on crisis intervention, impact of interpersonal dynamics and communication on crisis, and balancing decision-making and responsibility in managing crisis. Discussion Crisis is a multidimensional subjective experience, which also contributes to distress for family carers and professionals. Crisis interventions had limited and subjective benefit. They are influenced by accessibility of services, different understandings of "BPD" and human dynamics in complex decision-making, and can be experienced as helpful or harmful. Implications for practice Subjectivity of crisis experiences shows limitations of the diagnostic model of "BPD," emphasizing that interventions should remain person-centred. While thresholds for intervention are often met after self-harm or suicidality, professionals should review approaches to care and support people with underlying distress.

Borderline personality disorder and the ethics of risk management: The action/consequence model.

Patients with borderline personality disorder are frequent users of inpatient mental health units, with inpatient crisis intervention often used based on the risk of suicide. However, this can present an ethical dilemma for nursing and medical staff, with these clinician responses shifting between the moral principles of beneficence and non-maleficence, dependent on the outcomes of the actions of containing or tolerating risk. This article examines the use of crisis intervention through moral duties, intentions and consequences, culminating in an action/consequence model of risk management, used to explore potential outcomes. This model may be useful in measuring adherence and violation of the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence and therefore an aid to clinical decision making.