This paper explores the range of expectations of psychiatrists held by those in general management in the health service.

In most Western countries, including the UK, comprehensive mental health services are predominantly funded from State resources. The role of the psychiatrist has changed in the past 20 years and will without doubt change further in the next 20 years. Expectations of psychiatrists have changed and will continue to do so. We take the position that psychiatrists should continue to have the major leadership role in mental health and in so doing must become increasingly responsive to the changes taking place in health care planning and provision.

In medical practice it is crucial that symptom descriptions are as precise and objective as possible, which psychiatry attempts to achieve through its psychopathological lexicon. The term ‘autism spectrum disorder’ has now entered psychiatric nosology, but the symptom definitions on which it is based are not robust, potentially making reliable and valid diagnoses a problem. This is further compounded by the spectral nature of the disorder and its lack of clear diagnostic boundaries. To overcome this, there is a need for a psychopathological lexicon of 'social cognition’ and a classification system that splits rather than lumps disorders with core difficulties in social interaction.

This editorial discusses the needs of new consultants with reference to existing research and attempts made to meet these needs both within the Royal College of Psychiatrists and elsewhere. Some future challenges for new consultant psychiatrists are identified and discussed. Initiatives that can help meet their needs on a personal and also on an organisational level are suggested. A call is made for new consultants to take control of their own destiny using tried and tested methods and thereby creating hope for their future.

The Government White Paper ‘Working for Patients' (1989) incorporated the idea of general practitioners (GPs) managing funds in order to purchase health services for the patients under their care. The aim was for decisions about purchasing and providing health care to be taken as close to the patient as possible, by their own GP. It has meant that two forms of purchasing have grown side by side – health authority and GP fundholding. Subsequent policy changes have made fundholding accessible to more practices, and have extended the fundholders' areas of purchasing. More than 50% of the population in England are now covered by fundholding GPs. The proportion of GPs who are fundholders varies enormously geographically, with high levels in the West Midlands, Trent, South Thames, Oxford and Anglia regions, where the collective purchasing function of GP fundholders is now very considerable.

Although psychiatrists in England and Wales are generally familiar with the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, there is a body of law that is available to assist patients in the community with which they are generally less familiar. There are two main reasons for this. The first is that it is a rather confused amalgam of different statutes and case law affecting each other in ways that are less than clear. The other is that the care programme approach (CPA) was meant to cut through all this and make care provision straightforward. In fact, the latter has never been the case and community care law has always sat uneasily alongside the CPA, but in October 2008 the CPA was withdrawn from some patients with mental health problems. This article explains what is meant by community care law and how psychiatrists can use it to help their patients.

The importance of personality is recognised tacitly by the development of the multiaxial classifications of ICD–10 (World Health Organization, 1992) and DSM–IV (American Psychiatric Association, 1993). The separation of axis 1 or current mental state diagnosis from axis 2, on which personality is described, is a recognition that personality is separate from other aspects of the patient's diagnostic status. Nevertheless, many clinicians are sceptical that personality can be assessed reliably and some hold that the diagnosis should be abandoned as being merely judgemental and pejorative (Lewis & Appleby, 1988). There is some basis for scepticism in respect of reliability in view of the evidence that even with operational criteria the clinical assessment of personality is not transportable, and the level of agreement between practising clinicians is much less than that achieved during field trials (Mellsop et al, 1982).

Faster internet speeds and ever-present mobile phones present a new challenge to psychiatric wards – the ability for patients to live stream their in-patient stays. What are the benefits and the risks to the patient streaming and the ward as a whole? This article is to help start a conversation about this unique problem and how health professionals might go about addressing it.

The nature of culpability and agency in patients with a variety of psychiatric diagnoses is complex. In this article, a psychiatry resident (specialty trainee in psychiatry) reflects on a clinical encounter in medical school to demonstrate some of the benefits (including the removal of stigma) and dangers (including the threat to patients’ agency) of using the medical model to conceptualise psychiatric illness.

Deciding on where the tipping point between restrictions and deprivation arises in care settings has important legal implications, but until recently case law has not much helped to resolve these challenging issues. An important milestone has been the Supreme Court judgment in the so-called Cheshire West case. This judgment, handed down in March 2014, set a low threshold to apply (the ‘acid test’) in deciding when someone may be being deprived of their liberty and therefore that additional legal authorisation is required. The application of the acid test is not straightforward and its effects are wide-ranging. In this article, I discuss the evolution of the concept of deprivation of liberty in health and social care, the implications of the judgment and the application of the acid test. I also briefly highlight the interface between the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983.

Agitation and psychosis are two common distressing symptoms of dementia. The results of this issue's Cochrane Corner review suggest that, if a pharmacological approach is required, the use of risperidone and other atypical antipsychotics for the purpose of managing these symptoms seems questionable. Furthermore, typical antipsychotics, haloperidol in particular, might have a greater impact on agitation and psychosis than already recognised. This commentary critically appraises the evidence on the efficacy of typical and atypical antipsychotics for agitation and psychosis in dementia.

Part 1 of this three-part series on integrated care discussed the drivers for change in healthcare delivery in England set out in the NHS Long Term Plan. This second part explores the evolution of mental health services within the wider National Health Service (NHS), and describes important relevant legislation and policy over the past decade, leading up to the 2019 Long Term Plan. We explain the implications of this, including the detail of emerging structures such as integrated care systems (ICSs) and primary care networks (PCNs), and conclude with challenges facing these novel systems. Part 3 will address the practical local implementation of integrated care.

Methodological issues such as social desirability bias, subjective outcome measures, therapist enthusiasm and fidelity to the intervention remain a major problem in assessing the effectiveness of psychosocial treatments for substance misuse. Alcoholics Anonymous and other 12-step programmes are still widely used, although it is difficult to formally assess their effectiveness. Motivational interviewing is perhaps the most commonly used professional psychosocial treatment for substance misuse, but brief interventions based on this technique report a disappointing effect size (∼0.2). Contingency management is perhaps the most effective reported modality, although it remains politically controversial. Cognitive—behavioural therapy and community reinforcement have been widely studied, but the results are often disappointing (effect sizes seldom exceed 0.5, despite very large trials). Residential rehabilitation remains an established treatment, but patient selection prevents formal cost-effectiveness studies.