Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T15:26:34.305Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Letter to the Editor: Response to ‘The social determinants of psychosis in migrant and ethnic minority populations: a public health tragedy’

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 May 2009

S. P SINGH
Affiliation:
Professor of Social & Community Psychiatry and Consultant Psychiatrist, Health Sciences Research Institute, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, CoventryCV4 7AL, UK. (Email: [email protected])
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Type
Correspondence
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Morgan & Hutchinson's (Reference Morgan and Hutchinson2009) timely review on the social determinants of psychosis in ethnic minority groups is the latest in a series of papers challenging the assertion that such high rates are related to ‘institutional racism’ in psychiatry (Singh & Burns, Reference Singh and Burns2006; Murray & Fearon, Reference Murray and Fearon2007; Singh, Reference Singh2007). A high rate of psychosis in immigrants is not a new finding, having been first reported in the 1930s by Odegaard and since then repeatedly replicated. Even some of the architects of the ‘institutional racism’ claim have started accepting that there is indeed a very high incidence of psychosis in ethnic minorities, calling it ‘an epidemic’ (McKenzie, Reference McKenzie2007). The social aetiology of psychosis in migrants is also not novel. More than 20 years ago, a Canadian Task Force on Mental Health of Immigrants concluded that ‘while moving from one country and culture to another inevitably entails stress, it does not necessarily threaten mental health. The mental health of immigrants and refugees becomes a concern primarily when additional risk factors combine with the stress of migration’ (Canadian Task Force, 1988). In Britain, however, the ideological drive that places the cause of such higher incidence firmly but erroneously within psychiatric practice has led to years of neglect both of the unmet need of ethnic minorities and the political imperative needed to address the genesis of social disadvantage.

The authors also rightly point out that conflating issues around service use and access with population rates of the disorder has impeded the development of a single policy initiative aimed at reducing high rates of psychosis. However, problems of high rates and poor access are linked in as much as that the attribution of all ethnic differences to psychiatric racism has driven a wedge of mistrust between services and ethnic minority patients. Poor access to care is also related to socio-economic and cultural factors (Singh et al. Reference Singh, Greenwood, White and Churchill2007) and any strategy that deals with reducing high rates can not and should not stay divorced from actions to improve pathways into care.

Morgan & Hutchinson place the problem as occurring ‘in society’. This is of course broadly correct. Deprivation in the Black Caribbean community in the UK is longstanding, stretching back to the immediate post-war period and even before. A House of Commons Select Committee (Home Affairs Select Committee, 2007) set up to examine the causes of overrepresentation of Blacks within the criminal justice system in the UK commented that ‘the first settlers in post-war Britain from the Caribbean were forced into ghettoes because of racial prejudice and restricted access to accommodation, resulting in them being stacked in deprived areas where schools were substandard, employment opportunities were minimal and long-term prospects to hold the family together were limited’. Understanding the historical roots of such disadvantage is necessary but not sufficient in offering solutions, since British society is unlikely to change suddenly or undo its past. A simplistic division of the world into oppressive society and victim minority groups risks engendering a paralysing sense of impotence and a sullen acceptance of the status quo. Averting the public health tragedy so eloquently described by Morgan & Hutchinson requires a concerted effort that engages minority communities in a way that the nature and magnitude of the problem is understood and accepted, mistrust between minority communities and mental health services addressed and equitable and appropriate services offered. Anything less would indeed be a tragedy.

Declaration of Interest

None.

References

Canadian Task Force on Mental Health Issues Affecting Immigrants and Refugees (1988). Health and Welfare Canada, Ottawa.Google Scholar
Home Affairs Select Committee (2007). Young Black People and the Criminal Justice System. House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee: London.Google Scholar
McKenzie, K (2007). Being black in Britain is bad for your mental health. The Guardian, 2 April 2007, London.Google Scholar
Morgan, C, Hutchinson, G (2009). The social determinants of psychosis in migrant and ethnic minority populations: a public health tragedy. Psychological Medicine. Published online: 1 April 2009. doi:10.1017/S0033291709005546.Google Scholar
Murray, RM, Fearon, P (2007). Searching for racists under the psychiatric bed: Commentary on ‘Institutional racism in psychiatry’. Psychiatric Bulletin 31, 365366.Google Scholar
Singh, SP (2007). Institutional racism in psychiatry: lessons from inquiries. Psychiatric Bulletin 31, 363365.Google Scholar
Singh, SP, Burns, T (2006). Race and mental illness: there is more to race than racism. British Medical Journal 333, 648651.Google Scholar
Singh, SP, Greenwood, N, White, S, Churchill, R (2007). Ethnicity and the Mental Health Act 1983. British Journal of Psychiatry 191, 99–105.Google Scholar