While I was somewhat reassured by the acceptance into Basingstoke Counselling Service I knew that I was still in the middle of a swamp. I was up to my neck in a quagmire of issues and convinced that I needed urgent, psychotherapuetic intervetion
Isobel, my newly appointed counsellor was much appreciated but I knew enough about therapy to know that counselling is very different to psychotherapy. There are many ways of working or modalities in counselling and psychotherapy. Therapists may be trained in one approach or use techniques from different methods. Isobel was an unknown to me at the beginning of July 2022. I didn’t know if she would be a good therapist or a bad one. I certainly went into my work with her with insurmountable trust issues. Initially I saw Isobel as an interim measure, a stop-gap, someone who might uphold the BCS ethos and hold me until the real therapists arrived.
And so I continued to press The Bridge Centre to provide a suitable psychotherapuetic intervention. I also started asking for a mental health diagnosis. I was at the height of my distress, almost certainly neurotic, extremely emotionally disregulated. I firmly believed that I was suffering from Complex-PTSD and suspected I was also suffering from a personality disorder, maybe even Borderline Personality Disorder. However, CMHT The Bridge Centre continued to meet my requests with firm resistance and a rigid mindset, continuing to play hot potato with me, trying to offload me onto iTalk.
I was originally referred to iTalk following my mental health assessment at CMHT The Bridge Centre on the 8th February, 2022. I was assessed by Senior IPT Therapist, Kylie Salholm on the 17th March, 2022 and then taken to a liaison meeting where it was decided not to take me on. I was referred again to iTalk following my second mental health assessment at CMHT The Bridge Centre on the 25th April, 2022. I objected to this second referral, telling my assessor, Laura Jones, that I had previously been referred and rejected. Laura Jones insisted that I self-refer to iTalk, as if self-referral was going to make any difference. It didn’t.
I received the following letter from Kylie Selhome via email
‘10 May 2022
DOB: ********** NHS No: ************
Dear MARK,
I am writing to confirm that you are now discharged from iTalk as the Community Mental Health Team are currently assessing your needs. I wish you all the best for the future.
Yours sincerely,
Kylie Salholm
Senior IPT Therapist’
And then another letter
‘Mr MARK STOCK
24 May 2022
Dear MARK
DOB: ********** NHS No: ************
I am writing to you in response to your recent email sent to our italk team on Saturday 14th May. Within your email you highlighted your dissatisfaction with being discharged from the italk service and how you would like to access Psychological Therapy within the team. Firstly, we are really sorry to hear of your dissatisfaction, we always endeavour to ensure that we identify the appropriate treatment and support pathway for patients who access our service, with the aim and focus always being to move them towards their recovery goals and ensure their safety. Within your assessment with me on March 17th, 2022 you expressed how you were having a really difficult time and that you had planned to take your own life. You highlighted a number of difficult factors, including the struggle you have had getting support for your daughter and the ending of therapy which may have impacted your thoughts about yourself, other people and the world. As a result of these difficulties, you expressed how you no longer wanted to be alive and that once your daughter was appropriately cared for, you would take action on the plan you had made to end your life. As a service, we were really concerned to hear that these were thoughts that you were experiencing and because of these concerns we took action to ensure that you were getting the right care as quickly as possible to support you in being able to keep yourself safe. We decided to refer you to the Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) on the day of the assessment as they are the appropriate team that can offer support for individuals that are struggling with difficult thoughts surrounding hurting or harming themselves or have made plans to reflect this. We note that you had an assessment with the CMHT on April 26th and that they advised attending the Wellbeing Centre to complete an emotional coping skills course. Within the italk team we unfortunately do not have a crisis provision and often patients have to wait a period of time to access treatment with a therapist. With this in mind, we would strongly encourage you to access the support recommendations that have been made by the CMHT as this will hopefully ensure that you feel more comfortable in being able to keep yourself safe to then enable you to access therapeutic support either through italk or another psychological therapy service. We note therapy is often a very difficult experience for the individuals that we work with, therefore it is really important that they are in a space to be able to keep themselves safe either whilst awaiting treatment or accessing treatment. Again, we would really like to emphasise the importance of accessing the support recommended by the CMHT and following this you can re-refer to the italk service in the future to access psychological therapy. We would encourage you to continue utilising your risk management plan; you can contact your GP for an urgent appointment, call NHS 111 or Samaritans on 116 123. We wish you all the best in the near future and hope that you find accessing the recommended support helpful.
Kindest Regards,
Kylie Salholm
on behalf of the iTalk team’
Bear in mind Kylie Salholm’s written words
‘We decided to refer you to the Community Mental Health Team (CMHT) on the day of the assessment as they are the appropriate team that can offer support for individuals that are struggling with difficult thoughts surrounding hurting or harming themselves or have made plans to reflect this.’
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." This quote, rightly or wrongly attributed to Einstein, conveys a message about the need for new perspectives and approaches to address challenges effectively.
MISS MANAGEMENT
CMHT The Bridge Centre is divided into two teams, Rivers and Meadows, and patients are allocated a team based purely on where they live in the community. Both my daughter, Meg and I had been allocated to the Meadows team and the Service Manager of the Meadows Team at this time was Vicky Long. You’ll remember Vicky Long from my earlier blog post FOUR AND TWENTY DEAD CROWS # 24.
I received the following email from Vicky Long the day after the partial disclosure of my medical records by Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust
Thu 16/06/2022 09:15
Dear Mark,
I understand your access to records request has now been completed.
I wanted to update you that italk are having further discussions with their clinical leads on the best interventions for you and we will come back to you by the end of next week.
Thank you
Kind Regards
From: Mark Stock ******************** Sent: 27 June 2022 09:34 To: 'Long, Vicky' <Vicky.Long********************** Subject: RE: Updates - italk
I welcome ANY information regarding iTalks rationale, Vicky. I have already formulated a lengthy complaint with reference to my recently disclosed medical records and will add any and all evidence including the rationale behind iTalk’s refusal to offer therapy. I think we ALL know iTalk’s aversion to taking on patients who are at risk to themselves. I will not be blaming iTalk for their policy but will hold The Bridge Centre accountable for wasting valuable time and placing me at further risk to myself. I am taking this opportunity to, again, express my incredulity at the fact that it has, to date, been close on SIX MONTHS ( 23 weeks ) since I was originally delivered into the ‘care’ of The Bridge Centre and still have not been steered towards appropriate therapy.
From: Long, Vicky [mailto:Vicky.Long******************** Sent: 27 June 2022 08:38 To: Mark Stock ******************** Subject: RE: Updates - italk
Dear Mark,
Thank you for your email.
In relation to the italk therapy I apologise for not coming back to you by the end of last week as previously communicated. Italk have suggested that they do not feel there are able to offer the proposed therapy at this time and I was hoping to have a further discussion with them so I could give a clear rational to give to you as I know this will be disappointing to you.
I am really pleased to hear that you are commencing treatment with Basingstoke Counselling service and if iTalk were able to offer you input, you would not be able to have dual therapies running at the same time so one service would have to be withdrawn. Consequently, I think the most important outcome is that you are accessing appropriate support and that is positive.
I will give you a further update on iTalk’s rational when I have received it.
Thank you
Kind Regards
Vicky Long
Meadows CMHT Service Manager
From: Mark Stock ******************** Sent: 14 July 2022 17:14 To: Long, Vicky <Vicky.Long********************** Subject: RE: Updates - italk
Hi Vicky,
While my mind is on the subject, I’m still waiting for the update on iTalk’s rationale. Did you have a further discussion with them and if not, why?
The Bridge Centre have let the ball drop again. Is seems obvious to me that you’re barking up the wrong tree with iTalk and wasting valuable time in allocating resources to address my mental health concerns. My current engagement with BCS does NOT absolve you of responsibility of care in my case. There should have been alternative therapeutic options offered to me by now. This just adds to my list of grievances.
Regards,
Mark
Vicky Long replied
Dear Mark,
Yes I did and compiled an email to you on 29th June (attached) that I have found in my drafts. I am very sorry, I didn’t realise it didn’t send. I can only think I was interrupted before I had chance to send this and it was stored in my drafts as an unsent email without me realising.
I have attached the email for you to review.
Apologies again.
Kind Regards
Vicky Long
Meadows CMHT Service Manager
Dear Mark,
After discussion with Natalie Brown-Kennedy who is the Clinical Service Lead for iTalk, iTalk do not feel able to offer a service to you at this time. iTalk psychological therapies are able to work with patients who express suicidal ideation and self-harm behaviour who can engage in a safety management plan and maintain their own safety. iTalk have reviewed your clinical notes and after careful discussion have stated that they feel you remain too destabilised and distressed to engage in therapy with their service at this time. They also note you are now seeing Basingstoke Counselling and so they would not be able to offer intervention alongside of this.
iTalk are more than willing to consider a self-referral in the future when your current situation has become more stable. I appreciate this may feel rejecting and add to your distress at time however the decisions are made in light of the current risks and presentation.
It is positive that you have accessed support from Basingstoke Counselling service and I hope you find this intervention helpful.
Kind Regards
Vicky Long
Meadows CMHT Service Manager
Separate referrals had been made by CMHT The Bridge Centre following two mental health assessments but iTalk never wanted me. There had actually been NO realistic prospect of iTalk EVER taking me into their service.
There is documented evidence in my medical records that clearly demonstrates widespread scepticism among clinicians at CMHT, Crisis and even CAMHS over the decision to refer me to iTalk. That scepticism is evidenced, in writing, as early as the beginning of February, 2022 It later transpired that there were extenuating, and possibly legally-binding circumstances surrounding iTalk’s refusal to accept me into their service. It would have been known by all clinicians at CMHT The Bridge Centre that iTalk were ‘incredibly risk adverse’. As it was, almost FIVE MONTHS had been irretrievably carried away by the currents since the first referral and Vicky Long’s final acceptance that CMHT The Bridge Centre had been flogging a dead horse.
So, was this failure an example of incompetence?
The Peter principle is a concept in management developed by Laurence J Peter which observes that people in a hierarchy tend to rise to "a level of respective incompetence": employees are promoted based on their success in previous jobs until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent, as skills in one job do not necessarily translate to another. - https://youtu.be/m7-UdDg5uIw?si=6L1Iu2xmDqQFTTRd
Is CMHT The Bridge Centre promoting incompetent managers from within their ranks, promoting based on current, not future skills? Was there, and are there still those who cannot adapt and get stuck on the incompetence ladder?
Was Vicky Long entirely at fault? Certainly not. As far as I am aware, Vicky Long wasn't clinically trained. She was a 'services manager' a mediator between clinicians and patients, overseeing clinical and client care, facilitating team and clinical functioning, managing resources, maintaining professional standards and continuing professional development. The various clinicians working behind the scenes were also at fault and I will address them individually in later posts.
Competence is one thing. Integrity, ethics, values and honesty are another thing entirely.
I found this entry in my medical records disclosed by Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust on the 15th June, 2022.
‘April 29th BASINGSTOKE CMHT Outcoming discusion
Present; Vicky Long, Dr Augusta, Sean Dale Molloy, Laura Jones and Kendall Howard
Outcome ...Vicky Long would like Laura to reach out to CAMHS to let them know that Mark is still fixated on Sally.’
And these were my responses
‘Oh my god, Vicky. Even you.
Now I’m painfully aware that copied you into an email with Wanda just a few hours ago, an email that specifically references Sally. God. Should I have even have done that? I shouldn’t be trusting you Vicky, should I?. I probably shouldn’t even be trusting Wanda either. The gravity of the situation is still sinking in. The medical records show virtually everyone treating me like some kind of sex pest or worse. I’m trying to set the record straight but I seem to be unconsciously digging a bigger hole. Probably best if I jump straight in and give somebody the shovel so they can bury me and be done with me. It looks like my daughter’s mum is going to be converting the garage of the former family home into a temporary annexe for Meg. The work should be finished by September, Meg will finally be in a safe place and I will have outlived my usefulness.’
‘Remember when you phoned me on Friday to talk to me about my reaction to my disclosed medical records, Vicky? Remember my visceral response to the disgusting and dishonest accusations against my character, the fabrications and false allegations of criminality? Remember pulling me up on my reference to Sally, your misunderstanding, thinking I had been in contact with her? You were alarmed, weren’t you? You thought I’d spoken to her, didn’t you? I’ve been processing your reaction. You’re still at it aren’t you? Still monitoring me, still thinking of me as a risk, still believe I’m a ‘stalker’? Were you triggered to reach out to Camhs and let them know I was still ‘fixated’ on Sally? You’re all still at it. I don’t trust you, Vicky. I really, really want to but I don’t trust you. You’ve all lied so consistently. Your lies, dishonesty and deceit is in virtually every entry of my medical records .You’ve all treated me appallingly and you’re all still doing it. Treat me with respect. I’m not a criminal, for God’s sake!’
Vicky Long had been co-opted by CAMHS and the wider Sussex Partnership Trust. She was in cahoots with those that were actively engaged in misrepresenting me, in bed with those that had lied to me and about me. Vicky Long was assessing information prised out of me while I was at my most vulnerable and authorising the passing of that information on to CAMHS and the wider Sussex Partnership Trust. Vicky Long was part of a wider cohort of conspirators at CMHT The Bridge Centre who were covertly collaborating with CAMHS and the wider Sussewx Partnership Trust. ( I will return to Ian Whaites and especially Sean Dale-Malloy in later posts. ) This was, to all intent and purpose, low-grade espionage.
By mid-June, 2022 I knew I could no longer trust Vicky Long. Over the next few weeks I was to learn that I should never have trusted CAMHS General Manager, Wanda Reynolds.
