This paper looks at the relationship between fiction and psychiatry. Specifically, the idea of psychiatrists as fiction writers is explored, and reference is made to various fictional texts to illustrate the problems of stigma and negative imagery. These two main areas of focus are highlighted as ones that the practice of writing fiction might address, and some potential pitfalls are discussed. The paper suggests how psychiatrists might ameliorate the present problems by incorporating their unique clinical skills and knowledge into fictional narratives.

This article focuses on doctors and suicide. It provides real examples to illustrate why doctors die by their own hand. These reasons are replicated in the general population, but also include a host of additional risk factors related to being a doctor. In each case, information about the doctor is in the public domain or, as in one case, consent from the next of kin has been obtained for a detail not in the public domain. The author is a doctors' doctor, heading up a confidential health service for doctors with mental illness or addiction, the National Health Service Practitioner Health Programme. Mortality data from the programme (January 2008–January 2017) will also be included. For the sake of confidentiality, data is collated and details regarding age and gender have been approximated.

Although antidepressants are regarded as effective and specific treatments, they are barely superior to placebo in randomised trials, and differences are unlikely to be clinically relevant. The conventional disease-centred understanding of drug action regards antidepressants as targeting an underlying brain process, but an alternative ‘drug-centred’ view suggests they are psychoactive substances that modify normal mental states and behaviour. These alterations, such as numbing of emotions, may reduce feelings of depression, and also create amplified placebo effects in randomised trials. Patients should be informed that there is no evidence that antidepressants work by correcting a chemical imbalance, that antidepressants have mind-altering effects, and that evidence suggests they produce no noticeable benefit compared with placebo.

This paper argues for the inclusion of religion and spirituality in psychiatric care. After discussing the antagonism of psychiatrists and psychologists to religion, I present a critical overview of studies examining the relationships between spirituality, religion and diverse aspects of mental health: depression, suicide, anxiety, delinquency, drug abuse and schizophrenia. The need to assesses the impact of religion in different faith groups is discussed. Measures of religious coping, both positive and negative, may provide a more accurate portrayal as to how individuals deploy religion in their lives than global measures such as belief and attendance. I highlight the fact that there is a dearth of research on ritual, prayer and other aspects of religious experience. While many studies demonstrate positive effects of religion on mental health, others find detrimental effects. Finally I examine the clinical implications of these findings.

In this article I argue that fictional accounts of mental illness should be unethically unobliged. I suggest that art is not generated with conscious ethical intent and provide evidence that art proceeding from an ethical agenda is more likely to be poor art. I also consider ways in which a writer-doctor might need to compromise what they articulate to maintain a professional ethical integrity.

In 2012, the coalition government introduced the legal right for National Health Service (NHS) patients in England to choose their mental healthcare provider for out-patient treatment. This was a significant step towards parity of care between mental and physical ill health, and NHS Improvement and NHS England have provided sensible guidance on its implementation. However, several factors prevent the system from working as it was intended: lack of awareness of the principle of patient choice for out-patient treatment; complacency from some trusts and commissioners; mental health trusts operating outside the e-referrals system; misuse of care pathways; lack of direct access by many general practitioners for out-of-area referrals; and delays in authorisation for funding. I describe how I have come to this conclusion and suggest some solutions.