Sadeian power, the UK Government……… & CON-sultations

by Julia Evans on February 3, 2012

Contents

 

1)  A further post to www.LacanianWorks.net : my response to a Government CON-sultation, assumptions & the concrete wall which protects the collaborators & excludes everyone else.

2)  How Sadeian power works….  & how the UK Government uses it

3)  What goes wrong………..

4) An addition to the post on relations between Lacan’s work & Kierkegaard’s.

 

 

1)  A further post to www.LacanianWorks.net : my response to a Government CON-sultation, the assumptions & the concrete wall which protects the collaborators & excludes everyone else.

 

The following link takes you to my response to one of the 2010 UK Government CON-sultations.  This is the 4th Government CON-sultation to which I have submitted a response.  My arguments have been developed over the time of my engagement with Government action:  Since HPO2001 was passed into the legal framework backed by the Sadian or top-down power of the Privy Council.  Appeals against their decisions go straight, and expensively, into the High Court.

Reply to CON-sultation: Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS White Paper July 2010 by Julia Evans on October 9, 2010

Reasons for posting it:

i) An attempt is made to define the assumptions on which the Government’s aspirations or wish-list are built: for example, the use of Equity and Excellence as the One Standards which can be driven into Health Care using the Privy Council’s Sadeian power.

ii)  There has been no measurement of what is the base from which the Government wishes to move, no impact assessment of these changes and the question ‘Who benefits?’ has not been asked.  So this paper critiques the Government’s delusion of what will come about when they implement their fantastic ideas.

iii)  There is no proof that holding standards of practice, training, diagnosis & treatment in the Government’s central library of standards is relevant to practices based in relationships of trust between one human-BEING and another human-BEING.

iv)  There is no proof that the Government’s industrial, and financially driven, measurements of outcomes measure anything relevant to processes involved in the cure of human-BEINGs.

v)  There is no proof that the Government’s Happiness Factories (IAPT) produce Government standard Wellbeing or Mental Health. They are political camouflage.  This Government is busily closing down mental health provisions (including acute psychiatric wards) within the NHS because they are expensive and do not fit in their high-risk health industry. They boast about their provision via IAPT which is controlled by accountancy measurements and quality measures derived in factory-production processes. This move will reduce the NHS budget by millions & enable Cabinet members for health to boast about the increase in provision.

And there is no base-line measurement, no impact assessment and no-one has asked the question ‘Who benefits?’ (probably, as the answer is obvious – the Government covers itself with its delusional fig-leaf, hiding they are saving money whilst promising you wellbeing on the premise that health and wellbeing can be defined centrally and controlled with factory-derived systems, believed to be The scientifically-proven Truth.

v)  The Government has enshrined in its legislation, HPO2001, that the provision of safeguarding health and welbeing is a matter for Government action.  Read about what the discourse of protection produces within medicine.  To safeguard or protect is always perverse in that the Government, in assuming this position, assumes the idolatrous position of omniscience and omnipotence.  It acts as a god in total control of everything.

vi) NICE clinical guidelines are critiqued in this response.  They promise rational diagnoses, like using a ruler to measure, everyone produces the same answer. Further these labels: Anxiety, Depression, ADHD, are used to classify human-BEINGs as different to normal.  Further, it is probable that these classifications produce taint – just as taint was stuffed into the Jews by the Third Reich, so the Government publishes descriptions of how you tell to which label you belong & once labelled it sticks – unto which generation? 3rd? 4th?

Why does the Government centrally control diagnoses and recommend particular flavours of treatments?  So it can appear in its favourite role of ‘Protector in Chief’.

vii)  The Government knows how to train a practice involving a relationship between two people.  It is easy-peasey! You pay a committee of the Great & Good (usually academics after the prestige) to define the competences needed.  I may publish my comments on this process and its results in reply to a different CON-sultation soon.  You then teach, in a classroom (FE Colleges need the money and will do anything to retain their jobs), these competences so, in an academic test, they can be repeated back to you. Then you draw up lists of Entry Criterion from these competencies. Then you haul practitioners up in front of kangaroo courts, for the abusive practice of not taking notes.

Examples are given of this Government approved model of training a practice in academia.  Also given is an example of training in a different practice which also requires difficult ethical judgements to be made under conditions of stress.

viii) The government decrees that only HPC or CHRE–registered practitioners can be used in their Happiness Factories so the Government can safeguard users from rapists, murderers, and other criminal acts – see endnote i of my response.  In my response, it is explained that there has been no need for the Government to take this action.  There is no proven need. But no matter, a Minister of State (read it in Hansard!) trumpets this fabrication within the Houses of Parliament so makes it an established fact.  Read all about it: the Government WILL protect you from criminals masquerading as therapists, etc by using Sadeian, Privy Council power to control practitioners from the centre.

ix)  Registration:  Heroically, the House of Lords’ Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee blocked the HPC registering more than the psychologists.  Their report when passing the psychologists is very rude about the processes as used by the Government.  So did this stop the implementation of the Government’s high-risk industry in the provision of health care.  Well no.  The Famous Five went into negotiations with the Sadeian-power-driven via the Privy Council CHRE.  They protected their position as sole-suppliers to the Government-protected Happiness Factories – IAPT.  Because the CHRE is supposed to be voluntary, the Government can avoid scrutiny by the Merits Committee.  So this Government is operating in the perverse position of under or against the law.  There is no need for statutory registration except in the fertile imaginings of the omnipotent DoH.

x)  Of course, the Government is not acting alone in this delusional Sadeian power system.  They are supported by their collaborators from academia & the large (and very profitable) registration authorities.  These call themselves the New Savoy Partnership and include BACP, UKCP and BPC.  I call them the ‘Famous Five’ after Enid Blyton’s gang of do-gooders who acted in secret, far from the world of networks and relationships.  The ‘progress’ of this stitching up of the Government’s market in the provision of care to those with psychical symptoms of distress, has been noted on www.lacanianworks.net and before then in posting to the regx2 group. See below.

Before the December 2011 Savoy Conference, the bartering was particularly active.  The Minister made an offer the Famous Five found impossible to refuse.  They could become sole suppliers to the Government’s Happiness Factories (IAPT), providing they complied with being enslaved within the Government’s high-risk health industry, to CHRE, HPC, Skills for Health competencies, use of Privy Council power in complaints, and so on.  So they nobly threw away the development of the Talking Therapies over more than 100 years and said ‘Oh yes please – we really want to work within your frameworks as defined by HPC, CHRE, Skills for Health & Nice, we think your industrial measurements of outcomes and quality are wonderful, & we really want our members to be part of this systematic (& system-driven) provision of wellbeing, mental health & happiness.’   They negotiate deals in secrecy, probably because this stitch-up is against EU legislation as Dr Amaracelli explains, as quoted in my response.  Of course, for academia it is a double whammy – not only are they at risk of loosing the bonus for getting their graduates employed (IAPT) but they also risk loosing money for research into questions driven by this framework.

I have been commenting on this for over 10 years.  There follows that which I have posted to www.lacanianworks.net and tracks the manipulations between the Government and the Famous Five/New Savoy Partnership.  (By the way, if you access LacanianWorks home page and put Savoy into the search device, these will appear before your eyes.  Try it for the Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee, etc as well)

Government action closes existing facilities so contracted-out services can be used (& controlled): case 1 by Julia Evans on September 29, 2011

Your action is requested: Who is in bed with Whom (Part 2)? by Julia Evans on September 28, 2011

Back to the political battlefield……… where power operates by Julia Evans on September 21, 2011

Laing was rattling the cage of an establishment with vested interests who did not like to be questioned or held to account. by Julia Evans on September 6, 2011

Politicians speak: A Lib-Dem position: To inform your action by Julia Evans on September 5, 2011

Collaborators win: Putting the State Wellbeing Strategy to work….. by Julia Evans on February 8, 2011

Battle positions : Health and Social Care Bill January 19, 2011 by Julia Evans on February 1, 2011

Psychotherapy is imposed: Psycho-analysis© works: Psychoanalysis operates by Julia Evans on December 15, 2010

Who is in bed with whom (Part 2)? A call for your action. by Julia Evans on December 2, 2010

An explanation of Jacques Lacan’s use of cartels in organisational structure by Julia Evans on November 1, 1997 .

 

2.  How Sadeian power works….  & how the UK Government uses it

These are all taken from www.lacanianworks.net.  I have been exploring this topic since 2002 and intend to post some more research shortly.  Should you wish to keep updated when a new post appears, please request an RSS lead on LW site.

Sadeian power in use: By having its hand on Asia’s water tap, China is therefore acquiring tremendous leverage over its neighbours’ behaviour… by Julia Evans on August 31, 2011

The Government as Sadeian experimenter by Julia Evans on August 17, 2011

Principles based in trust and relationships versus Sadeian absolute control by Julia Evans on August 14, 2011

What works – tackling out-of-limits destruction and violence by Julia Evans on August 14, 2011

Not If, but when by Bruno de Florence on August 11, 2011

Ethics: the Sadean & Kantian position and how the Lacanian psychoanalytic position differs by Julia Evans on July 28, 2011

On limits by Julia Evans on July 27, 2011

Who is in bed with whom (Part 2)? A call for your action. by Julia Evans on December 2, 2010

Wellbeing & Happiness as used by the UK Government by Julia Evans on May 7, 2007.  This text examines the two forms of legislating & governing in use in the UK and contrasts the use of outcome measurement and risk analysis in England and Denmark.

 

3.  What is going wrong?

 

These are taken from the ‘What is going wrong?’ category on www.lacanianworks.net. To find it go to the home page and look at the categories down the right hand side.  These are a very small proportion of what is on my computer and that is a miniscule portion of what is happening NOW in the Government’s high-risk health industry.

The Importance of Being Scientific, an Earnest Reflection by Philippe Grisar on December 8, 2011 Quote: Psychoanalysis is often refuted for not being scientific. Of course it isn’t scientific when one restricts science to neo-positivism. Neo-positivism is an epistemology, a theory of science. This stands for (…)

How Government Action goes wrong…. ‘The report says the department pushed ahead without undertaking basic project approval checks, taking decisions before testing the ideas for feasibility.’ by Julia Evans on September 20, 2011. Quote:My comments  and the title are provoked by the report of the Fire service Reorganisation as in the Guardian[i]   From the Guardian report: – Margaret Hodge, the Labour chair (…)

Laing was rattling the cage of an establishment with vested interests who did not like to be questioned or held to account. by Julia Evans on September 6, 2011. Quote:The title comment is from Bruce Scott[i] .   This comment is extremely important as the UKCP, BPC, BACP, and other members of the New Savoy Partnership  are currently sewing (…)

An historical look at treatments for human conditions of mental distress – are the same parameters still driving treatments? by Julia Evans on August 24, 2011. Quote:In a programme which claims to celebrate the best in British history[i], “Ruby Wax takes a look at some of the grisly techniques that were used on patients inside Victorian (…)

To limit or not to limit: to be or not to be, that is the question by Julia Evans on August 11, 2011. Quote: ‘We risk justifying greed by suggesting that the things we want are potentially unlimited.[i] ‘ Giles Fraser Limits based in relationships or limits enforced top-down with rules and regulations to (…)

Forced Compliance in NHS: The dumbing down of thoughtfulness by Bruce Scott on July 4, 2011. Quote:From job description of an NHS Trainee Child Psychotherapist post. “To take an evidence-based approach and show preparedness to collaborate with outcome measurement and generally comply with clinical and social (…)

The Government’s outcomes measurements – Education by Julia Evans on June 28, 2011. Quote:The Government is not just running a high-risk health industry, it is also in total control of the country’s education industry.  And the Government’s Education Factories, in this case the (…)

Evaluation believes neither in the value of professional ethics nor in institutional regulations. It mistrusts what is human. by Julia Evans on June 14, 2011

An anonymous personal testimony: Putting the State Wellbeing strategy to work…….. by Julia Evans on February 10, 2011. Quote:Hello, This personal testimony is impressive.  It was provoked by the circulation of the Government’s strategy for Mental Health on 2ndFebruary – see Collaborators win: Putting the State Wellbeing Strategy to (…)

Reply to CON-sultation: Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS White Paper July 2010 by Julia Evans on October 9, 2010

Why is the Ideology of Evaluation Pernicious? by Jean-Claude Maleval on April 14, 2010. Quote:The methodological evaluation of services spread across the entire western world in the 1990s, attacking in particular the health systems and the universities. Its major principle consists in working to (…)

Book Review by Richard House on February 28, 2010. Quote: A review of Irving Kirsch, The Emperor’s New Drugs: Exploding the Antidepressant Myth, …

Fit to Practice? The Experience of State Registration from the perspective of an art therapist by Kevin Jones on October 9, 2009. Quote:Art therapy as a profession has never critically reflected upon the effects of state regulation on its teaching and practice. There is  no evidence that state regulation has improved either (…)

Wellbeing & Happiness as used by the UK Government by Julia Evans on May 7, 2007.  This text examines the two forms of legislating & governing in use in the UK and contrasts the use of outcome measurement and risk analysis in England and Denmark.

The ‘TRUTH’ of Kant’s moral law : Fantasy and the Limits of Enjoyment by Jean-Louis Gault on October 1, 2003. Quote:A commentary on Jacques Lacan’s ‘Kant with Sade’

An explanation of Jacques Lacan’s use of cartels in organisational structure by Julia Evans on November 1, 1997

It almost looks as if analysis were the third of those ‘impossible’ professions in which one can be sure beforehand of achieving unsatisfying results. The other two, which have been known much longer, are education and government. by Julia Evans on January 2, 1937. Quote from Sigmund Freud …

 

4) Further quotes on the relation between Lacan and Kierkegaard available at:

 

Some relations between Jacques Lacan and Søren Kierkegaard: Seminars II, VII, X, XVII, XX & two of the Écrits or as follows: http://www.lacanianworks.net/?p=209

CONCLUSION:

 

The effects of the discourse of prevention, enmeshed in the finances of cutting, & the protection of your patch……. , woven around with scientific gobble-de-gook and placed within the discourse of a high-risk factory or production process.

You probably could not make it up but this Government can……..

_________________________

regx2 works in relationships with others to:

Enable sufferers from symptoms of psychical or mental distress to choose the treatment or practice which works for them rather than the One prescribed by the government.

 

Resist the top-down imposition by the law of the One Standard driving practitioners’ training, development, practice, ethics, complaints procedure, etc that produces unhealthy uniformity.  N.B.  The DoH Scoping Project (July 2005) found 571 training organisations.  This strategy seeks to support this healthy diversity rather than protect or prioritise one or a section of its variants.