Tag Archives: mental health policy

National Ethnic mental health Carer Forum : May Update 2026

Blog by Ethnic Mental Health Carer forum Chair – Matthew McKenzie

The May 2026 Ethnic Mental Health Carers Forum brought together carers, researchers, clinicians, community leaders, and representatives from mental health organisations across England. Although attendance was smaller than usual, the discussion was rich, honest, and highly informative, covering Mental Health Act reform, carers’ experiences, service inequalities, innovative approaches to care, and new research opportunities.

For those who were unable to attend, this blog provides a comprehensive overview of the meeting, including key presentations, audience questions, responses from speakers, and useful resources shared during the session.

Opening Remarks

As the chair, I welcomed attendees and outlined the agenda. The meeting focused on following:

  • Mental Health Act research and reform
  • Carers’ experiences supporting loved ones through detention
  • Findings from a major East Sussex carers research project
  • Resources for carers under the Mental Health Act
  • Electronic Health Records and future developments
  • Wider discussions on racial trauma, inequalities, and service improvement

The meeting also provided opportunities for networking, sharing lived experiences, and highlighting innovative projects happening across the country.

Research Study: Supporting a Loved One Through Mental Health Detention

Dr Maeve Conneely from University College London opened the meeting with a presentation on a new research study exploring the experiences of people who have been assessed or detained under the Mental Health Act, as well as the experiences of family members and carers who supported them through that process. The study has been commissioned as part of the wider programme of Mental Health Act reform and aims to understand how the current “Nearest Relative” provisions operate in practice before changes are introduced under the new legislation.

Dr Conneely explained that researchers are particularly interested in hearing from carers who were involved in supporting a loved one but who were not formally recognised as the “Nearest Relative” under the existing legal framework. She highlighted that these experiences are especially important because they can reveal where carers have been excluded from decision-making, denied access to information, or prevented from contributing to assessments despite playing a significant role in supporting the individual concerned. The study is open to anyone aged 16 or over who has direct experience of Mental Health Act assessments, detentions, Community Treatment Orders, holding powers, or related interventions, whether as a patient or as a supporter.

The research is linked to ongoing reforms of the Mental Health Act and seeks to understand how the “Nearest Relative” provisions currently operate before changes are implemented.

Who Can Take Part?

The study is looking for:

  • People who have been detained under the Mental Health Act
  • Family members and carers who supported someone during detention or assessment
  • Individuals who should have been involved as a nearest relative but were not
  • Anyone aged 16 or over with relevant experience

Interviews are conducted online and participants receive a £30 shopping voucher as a thank-you for their time.

Key Question from Participants

Q: Does the study include situations where someone should have been involved but wasn’t?

Response: Yes. Researchers are particularly interested in understanding experiences where carers or family members were excluded from decision-making processes despite playing a significant caring role.

Another Important Question

Q: Do carers need permission from the person who was detained before participating?

Response: No. Carers are sharing their own experiences and therefore only need to provide their own consent.

Discussion Themes

Participants highlighted:

  • Long-standing inequalities affecting Black communities under the Mental Health Act.
  • The overuse of psychiatric labels without sufficient exploration of trauma.
  • The need to understand why some individuals receive significantly different experiences of care, including access to private mental health facilities.
  • Concerns about trust in mental health services and the lasting impact of poor experiences across generations.

Several carers committed to taking part in the study to ensure lived experience informs future policy.

East Sussex Carers Research Project: What Carers Told Us

Age Angiolini presented findings from a year-long carers-led research project examining the experiences of family carers supporting people with serious mental illness across East Sussex. The study was developed in response to repeated concerns raised by carers at local support meetings and sought to capture their experiences of interacting with mental health services provided by the Sussex Partnership Foundation Trust (SPFT).

Although the research received 71 responses, representing only a proportion of the carers population in the region, the findings revealed a striking consistency in the challenges carers face. The survey explored themes including carers’ involvement in care planning, communication with services, consent and confidentiality, quality of care, crisis support, and priorities for improvement. Among the most significant findings were that 72% of carers reported being only sometimes involved or not involved at all in their loved one’s care, 73% felt services relied too heavily on carers, and 72% said they regularly had to advocate to secure appropriate support. The research concluded that many carers feel undervalued, excluded from decision-making, and left carrying significant responsibilities without adequate recognition or support.

The study gathered responses from carers supporting people with:

  • Schizophrenia
  • Bipolar disorder
  • ADHD
  • Autism
  • Complex neurodiverse conditions

Although the sample size was relatively modest, the findings revealed significant and consistent concerns.

Key Findings from the report

Carers Feel Excluded

  • 72% reported being only sometimes involved or not involved at all.
  • 73% felt services relied too heavily on carers.
  • 72% said they had to advocate strongly to secure appropriate care.

Communication Failures

Participants reported poor communication between:

  • Mental health services
  • Assessment teams
  • Social services
  • Mental health liaison teams

Many carers described communications as inconsistent, unclear, and difficult to navigate.

Consent and Confidentiality

A recurring concern was that confidentiality procedures are often applied rigidly, preventing carers from sharing vital information during crises.

Carers argued that this can actively undermine effective care.

Quality of Care Concerns

The research found:

  • 90% reported insufficient care.
  • Significant concerns around continuity of care.
  • A strong desire for dedicated care coordinators.
  • Widespread frustration with crisis services.

Crisis Support is Not Working

Many carers reported that:

  • NHS 111 is often inadequate for mental health crises.
  • A&E is frequently unsuitable for people experiencing mental distress.
  • Services remain reactive rather than preventative.

Calls for Change

Recommendations included:

  • Better crisis pathways
  • Improved coordination between services
  • More trauma-informed approaches
  • Greater therapeutic support
  • Increased family involvement
  • Better support for neurodiverse individuals

The presentation sparked considerable discussion, with many attendees noting that the findings reflected experiences they had encountered for years.

Carers Speak Out: Frustration, Trauma and the Need for Change

One of the most powerful aspects of the meeting was hearing directly from carers.

Several participants reflected on decades of involvement with mental health services and expressed concern that despite repeated reviews, consultations, and reforms, many of the same issues continue to persist.

Common themes included:

  • Institutional racism
  • Poor communication
  • Exclusion of carers
  • Over-medicalisation
  • Lack of trauma-informed care
  • Inadequate support during crises

A number of attendees emphasised that families often become de facto care coordinators, managing appointments, services, medications, and crises while receiving little support themselves.

One participant observed:

“They plan, medicate and treat. We care. Our worlds don’t meet.”

Others highlighted the impact of racial trauma and the way mental health services can fail to recognise the cultural context of distress.

Open Dialogue: A Different Way Forward?

Ren Reins introduced the concept of Open Dialogue, an internationally recognised approach to mental health care that focuses on relationships, networks, and collaborative conversations.

Open Dialogue aims to:

  • Bring families and professionals together
  • Reduce fragmentation between services
  • Focus on lived experience
  • Build trust
  • Improve recovery outcomes

Ren explained that major NHS-funded trials are underway and encouraged carers to learn more about the approach.

The discussion generated significant interest, particularly from attendees looking for alternatives to traditional medical models of care.

Nearest Relative Resources Project

Professor Judy Laing from the University of Bristol provided an update on an innovative project designed to support family members and carers who hold, or may hold, responsibilities under the Mental Health Act’s “Nearest Relative” provisions. Drawing on previous research with carers and mental health professionals, Professor Laing explained that many family members who find themselves in the Nearest Relative role often receive little information, guidance, or emotional support despite carrying significant legal responsibilities. In response, her team secured funding to develop a free, co-produced online resource that helps carers understand their rights, responsibilities, and options when supporting a loved one through mental health assessment, detention, and treatment.

Developed in partnership with carers, family members, mental health professionals, and organisations including Mind, Rethink Mental Illness, and Carers Trust, the website provides practical information, downloadable tools, guidance for conversations with professionals, and resources to help carers look after their own wellbeing. Professor Laing stressed that the project has been shaped directly by the experiences of those who have undertaken the role themselves, ensuring that the guidance reflects the realities and challenges carers face in practice rather than simply explaining legal processes.

The project emerged from research identifying significant gaps in information and support for people carrying out the “Nearest Relative” role.

What Has Been Developed?

The project has created a free online resource containing:

  • Information about legal rights
  • Guidance on conversations with professionals
  • Practical tools for meetings
  • Support for carers’ wellbeing
  • Resources explaining upcoming legal changes

The materials have been co-produced with carers and family members.

Questions Raised

How are diverse communities included?

Participants asked how the project ensures equity and accessibility.

Professor Laing explained that:

  • People from ethnic minority backgrounds have contributed to development.
  • Resources are being improved to increase accessibility.
  • Additional funding is supporting work around inclusion and accessibility.
  • Translation and alternative formats are being explored.

How is the project promoted?

Discussion focused on ensuring communities are aware of available support rather than resources existing only online.

Professor Laing outlined efforts involving:

  • Mind
  • Carers Trust
  • Mental health services
  • Local media
  • Carer forums

How will the new Nominated Person role protect carers who have traditionally been involved in supporting a loved one?

Several participants expressed concern that replacing the Nearest Relative role could unintentionally weaken the involvement of family members who have historically provided substantial support during periods of mental ill-health. Questions were raised about situations where a person may choose someone other than their primary carer to act as their Nominated Person, potentially reducing carers’ ability to access information or participate in key decisions. Professor Laing acknowledged that these concerns have been raised by many carers and explained that the practical details of how the new system will operate are still being developed. She stressed the importance of carers contributing their experiences to ensure that future guidance recognises the valuable role families often play in supporting recovery and maintaining continuity of care.

What support is available when professionals fail to recognise or understand carers’ legal rights?

Attendees also discussed the reality that many mental health professionals are not always familiar with the legal powers and rights associated with the Nearest Relative role. Participants described situations where carers were excluded from discussions, not informed of important decisions, or felt unable to challenge professional opinions because they lacked confidence in their understanding of the law. In response, Professor Laing highlighted that one of the main objectives of the Bristol resources project is to bridge this knowledge gap by providing practical tools, suggested questions, and clear explanations of carers’ rights. She noted that the project is also developing resources aimed at professionals themselves, with the goal of increasing awareness and ensuring that carers’ legal rights are better understood and respected across mental health services.

Attendees welcomed the commitment to increasing visibility.

Electronic Health Records and Future Developments

Dr Anna De Simoni, an Academic GP and Associate Professor of Primary Care at Queen Mary University of London, presented an early-stage research proposal focused on how electronic health records could be used to better understand and map the social support networks surrounding people living with multiple long-term health conditions.

Dr De Simoni sought direct feedback from carers to help shape the project before a formal funding application is submitted. She explained that while healthcare professionals can usually identify a patient’s next of kin and household members through existing GP records, they often have very limited understanding of the wider support networks that play a vital role in a person’s wellbeing.

These networks may include family members, neighbours, friends, faith groups, community organisations, carers, and others who provide practical and emotional support. The research aims to explore whether technology and electronic health records can help healthcare professionals better recognise these support systems and use that information to improve care planning, reduce unnecessary hospital admissions, and enhance quality of life for people living with complex health conditions.

The discussion generated considerable interest, particularly regarding:

  • Information sharing
  • Integration across services
  • Support for carers
  • Data protection concerns
  • Improving continuity of care

Several participants expressed enthusiasm about the potential benefits while also raising questions regarding privacy and access to NHS information.

Questions and Answers from Dr Anna De Simoni’s Presentation

Q: What problem is this research trying to solve?
A: Dr De Simoni explained that healthcare professionals often know very little about the wider support network surrounding a patient. While medical records may identify a next of kin or people living in the same household, they rarely capture the full picture of who is actually providing practical, emotional, or day-to-day support. The project aims to better understand these social networks and use that information to improve care planning and patient outcomes.

Q: Who is the research aimed at?
A: The initial focus is on people living with multiple long-term health conditions, including illnesses such as COPD and other complex health needs e.g mental health. The project seeks to understand how stronger recognition of support networks could improve quality of life, reduce hospital admissions, and support people to remain independent for longer.

Q: How would patients contribute information about their support network?
A: The proposal includes the use of a Universal Care Plan through the NHS App. Patients would be able to enter information themselves about what matters to them, who supports them, how they prefer to be treated, and what should happen if their health deteriorates. This information could then be viewed and updated by relevant healthcare professionals.

Q: What role could carers play within the proposed system?
A: Participants highlighted that carers often provide the majority of practical support but are frequently invisible within healthcare systems. The proposed approach could make carers more visible by helping professionals understand who is involved in supporting a patient and what role they play in maintaining wellbeing and independence.

Q: How will patient confidentiality and data protection be managed?
A: Concerns were raised about privacy and the security of NHS data. Dr De Simoni explained that information governance, GDPR compliance, and data protection would be central to the project. Specialists in privacy and information governance would be involved to ensure that any information collected is handled safely, appropriately, and with proper consent.

Key Discussion: Why Are Carers Still Fighting the Same Battles?

A recurring theme throughout the meeting was the sense that many challenges identified today are the same challenges carers raised ten or twenty years ago.

Questions included:

  • Why are services still fragmented?
  • Why do carers continue to feel excluded?
  • Why are communication problems so persistent?
  • Why is trauma often overlooked?
  • Why do inequalities remain entrenched?

Participants reflected on whether the issue is primarily one of resources, leadership, service design, or culture.

Many agreed that meaningful change requires carers to remain actively involved in shaping policy and service delivery.

Resources and Links Shared During the Meeting

Mental Health Act Research Study

Email:
nrmha@ucl.ac.uk

Eligibility:
People aged 16+ who have experience supporting someone assessed or detained under the Mental Health Act.

Nearest Relative Resources Website

Welcome to the resources

Nearest Relative Resources Impact Report

https://bpb-eu-w2.wpmucdn.com/blogs.bristol.ac.uk/dist/a/1212/files/2026/05/2026-05-Nearest-Relatives-Resources-impact-report.pdf

POPs Facebook Group

https://www.facebook.com/groups/POPSUnitedKingdom

A carers support group recommended during discussion as a source of peer support and shared experience.

Final Reflections

The May 2026 Ethnic Mental Health Carers Forum highlighted both the challenges carers continue to face and the determination across the sector to improve outcomes.

From Mental Health Act reform and carers’ rights to innovative approaches such as Open Dialogue, the meeting demonstrated the importance of bringing together lived experience, research, policy, and practice.

Several speakers reminded attendees that change often begins with carers sharing their stories, participating in research, challenging poor practice, and helping shape future services.

The forum remains an important space where those voices can be heard.

National Ethnic mental health Carer Forum : April Update 2026

If you weren’t able to join us for this month’s online forum, you missed a deeply insightful session packed with research updates and honest conversations. As a carer myself, I know how hard it is to find time for these meetings, so I’ve put together this expanded summary to keep you in the loop on the vital work being done for our community.

Meeting Agenda

  • Welcome and Intro: The role of the Patient Care Race Equality Framework (PCREF).
  • Speaker 1: Brenda Hayaka (King’s College London): Findings on ethnic inequalities in healthcare and the new “Interception” study.
  • Q&A Session: Addressing dementia stigma, medication, and language barriers.
  • Spirituality & Faith: Insights from Tuulia Castledine (Chaplain at SWLSTG) on recovery and holistic care.
  • Speaker 2: Becky Forster (University of Southampton): Supporting carers facing harmful or upsetting behaviors.
  • Local Advocacy: Healthwatch Croydon’s role in gathering carer feedback.
  • Closing: “Rooted and Growing” (A PCREF poem).

Key Speaker: Brenda Hayaka – The Interception Project

Brenda shared findings from her previous work on ethnic inequalities and introduced her new study on Multiple Long-Term Conditions (MLTCs).

Brenda Hayaka opened her keynote by sharing the heart behind her work on ethnic inequalities in healthcare. Drawing on her previous research, she described how minoritised ethnic patients and their carers often face significant challenges navigating multiple long-term conditions (MLTCs) with little support or recognition. She emphasized that while global interventions exist for conditions like diabetes and depression, there is a notable gap in UK-based research specifically addressing MLTCs in minoritised communities. This “major evidence gap” became the driving force behind her current study, The Interception Project.

What the Research Shows:

  • Systemic Disadvantage: Minoritized ethnic groups are disadvantaged from the development to the management of multiple conditions.
  • Poor Continuity of Care: Many experience poor therapeutic relationships with practitioners.
  • The UK Evidence Gap: While interventions for depression and diabetes exist globally, Brenda found zero studies specifically targeting MLTCs for minoritized groups within the UK healthcare system.

The “Interception” Study:

The Interception Project uses a creative and collaborative method called journey mapping to trace the lived experiences of patients and unpaid carers. Brenda explained that this approach goes beyond merely collecting data: it seeks to identify the pathways people take when seeking help, the barriers they encounter, and the moments where the healthcare system fails them. By listening deeply and reflecting these experiences back to communities, the research provides actionable insights into improving care quality and equity. The study is expanding beyond London to include Coventry and Manchester, recognizing that every community has unique strengths, challenges, and solutions.

Brenda highlighted that a central aim of the project is to co-create actionable recommendations with communities. These recommendations are intended for NHS leaders, commissioners, and policymakers, ensuring that the voices of carers and patients directly inform service design and delivery. She also spoke about the role of trusted community leaders in building access and overcoming barriers such as language differences, mistrust of institutions, and cultural stigma around certain health conditions. Faith communities, she noted, can play a crucial role not only as support networks for participants but also as partners in research, data collection, and advocacy for change.

Throughout her presentation, Brenda emphasized that understanding the journey of carers and patients requires attention to both systemic and relational factors. Minoritised ethnic groups often experience disadvantages in developing and managing multiple conditions, and poor continuity of care can weaken therapeutic relationships with practitioners. By documenting these experiences in detail, the Interception Project aims to fill the evidence gap and provide a roadmap for more equitable, culturally sensitive care. Brenda closed her keynote by reminding attendees that meaningful equity in healthcare begins when previously invisible experiences are recognized and acted upon—a call to transform insight into change.

Spirituality in Care: Forum Introduction by Matthew McKenze

I had the honor of opening the spirituality segment of the forum, emphasizing the vital role that faith and cultural practices play in supporting carers and patients from minoritised ethnic communities. I framed the discussion around the idea that mental health care cannot be fully effective unless it recognizes the whole person, including their spiritual and cultural identity. I highlighted that carers often draw strength, resilience, and meaning from their faith, and that this dimension is frequently overlooked in traditional mental health services.

I encouraged participants to consider spirituality not as an abstract concept, but as a tangible resource that can inform recovery, foster belonging, and enhance coping strategies. By acknowledging spiritual needs, mental health providers can build trust with communities that have historically experienced marginalization or misunderstanding within healthcare systems. I also set the tone for an open and reflective conversation, inviting attendees to share experiences, insights, and challenges related to integrating faith and mental health support.

By positioning spirituality as both a personal and systemic consideration, the forum aimed to explore how services can better engage with faith perspectives in a respectful, inclusive, and practical way. This introduction laid the groundwork for Tuulia Castledine’s keynote, which delved deeper into the spiritual tools and frameworks that support carers and patients in their mental health journeys.

Spirituality in Care: Insights from Tuulia Castledine (SWLSTG)

We were joined by Tula, a Chaplain from South West London and St George’s (SWLSTG), who led a vital discussion on the spiritual dimension of mental health.

Tuulia highlighted that for many carers and patients, faith is not just a personal practice but a framework through which they make sense of mental health crises. Spirituality often provides a lens for understanding why challenges occur and offers a source of hope, helping individuals navigate uncertainty with resilience.

Beyond offering meaning, Tuulia explained that spirituality can serve as a practical tool in recovery. It provides a “language for recovery” that allows carers and patients to express experiences and emotions that might otherwise be difficult to articulate. This sense of connection fosters belonging and strengthens the psychological resources people draw upon when coping with mental health challenges.

Tuulia also stressed the importance of services adopting what she called “spiritual curiosity.” Mental health professionals are encouraged to engage openly with faith perspectives rather than making assumptions or ignoring them. By integrating spirituality into holistic, person-centered care, services can better meet the needs of minoritised ethnic communities.

Finally, Tuulia highlighted a critical concern: when services fail to acknowledge faith, they risk deepening the mistrust that many minority communities feel toward mental health providers. Recognizing and valuing spiritual needs, she emphasized, is not just compassionate—it is a crucial component of equitable care, fostering trust, understanding, and more effective therapeutic relationships.

Summing up Tuulia’s talk

  • Making Sense of Illness: For many, faith is how they make sense of why a crisis is happening and where they can find hope.
  • A Tool for Recovery: Spirituality provides a “language for recovery” and can build resilience and a sense of belonging.
  • Moving Beyond Assumptions: Tula emphasized that services need to show “spiritual curiosity” and include faith as part of holistic, person-centered care.
  • The “Mistrust” Gap: When services ignore faith, it can deepen the mistrust minority communities feel toward mental health providers.

Carer Voice: Questions & Feedback

The Q&A session was one of the most powerful segments of the forum, offering an unfiltered view of the real-world barriers faced by carers and minoritised ethnic communities. Participants shared candid experiences, highlighting gaps in current mental health support and pressing for practical solutions.

A professional opened the discussion by addressing the critical issue of language and access. She pointed out that many research projects and healthcare initiatives fail because they do not allocate adequate resources for language interpretation or accessibility for disabled individuals. Without these provisions, vital services and studies inadvertently exclude those who may benefit most, leaving carers and patients marginalized.

A carer contributed a particularly thought-provoking critique regarding medication versus conversation. He challenged the system on why Black men are often prescribed stronger medication for longer periods rather than being offered meaningful dialogue and psychosocial support. This raised an important conversation about the need for culturally sensitive approaches to treatment that value listening, understanding, and relationship-building alongside pharmacological intervention.

The unpaid carer also highlighted the challenge of dementia stigma within older generations of minoritised communities. He described how deeply ingrained cultural perceptions can make it difficult for families to seek early support or even acknowledge the condition, creating additional stress for carers. The discussion emphasized that tackling stigma requires both education and culturally attuned engagement, alongside support networks that respect the values and experiences of carers and patients.

A mental health professional from another mental health NHS trust added a vital perspective on community engagement and trust-building. He emphasized that carers often encounter inconsistent communication from services and a lack of culturally informed support, which can leave families feeling isolated and unsupported. He urged healthcare providers to work more closely with community leaders, faith groups, and carers themselves to co-design services that truly respond to the specific needs of minoritised ethnic communities.

Overall, the feedback session underscored that systemic improvements must be informed by the lived experiences of carers. Their insights illuminated the gaps between policy, research, and practical care, reminding the forum that real change is rooted in listening to and amplifying these voices.

Support for Carers in Crisis

Becky Forster introduced a deeply important new study funded by Marie Curie, focusing on carers who find themselves in extremely challenging and sometimes frightening situations. The research aims to better understand the experiences of carers who have faced harmful, aggressive, or abusive behaviors from the person they care for, particularly at the end of life. Becky emphasized that these situations are often overlooked in traditional guidance, leaving carers without the support or strategies they need to cope safely and effectively.

The study seeks to gather real-life experiences from carers, acknowledging that their insights are invaluable in shaping practical and compassionate guidance for healthcare providers. Becky explained that the goal is not only to document these difficult experiences but also to translate them into actionable tools and recommendations for the NHS, ensuring that carers receive timely support, protection, and training when dealing with complex end-of-life care scenarios. By centering the voices of those who have lived through these crises, the project hopes to reduce isolation, increase safety, and enhance the wellbeing of carers facing some of the most emotionally and physically demanding circumstances.

Becky encouraged attendees to participate and share their stories, reassuring them that contributions would remain confidential and that their experiences could directly influence policy and practice. This initiative highlighted the critical need for systemic recognition of carers’ emotional and practical needs, ensuring that they are not left to navigate trauma and stress alone. The session reinforced that understanding, guidance, and compassionate support are essential for carers’ resilience and for providing safe, dignified care to those at the end of life.

Croydon Healthwatch

We concluded the forum with an important reminder from Anna of Healthwatch Croydon, who emphasized that anyone in England has the right to provide anonymous feedback on their care. Anna highlighted that this is more than a formal process, it is a powerful tool for carers, patients, and communities to have their voices heard. By sharing experiences of both excellent and inadequate care, individuals can directly influence how services are shaped, highlight gaps in provision, and push for improvements where they are most needed.

Anna also underscored that feedback plays a crucial role in holding policymakers and healthcare leaders accountable. When carers and patients report their experiences, patterns of inequality, or systemic barriers, it creates evidence that decision-makers cannot ignore. This feedback is particularly vital for minoritised ethnic communities, where historical mistrust and underrepresentation have often left issues unaddressed. She encouraged all attendees to see feedback not as a bureaucratic exercise, but as an instrument of empowerment, helping to drive change at both local and national levels.

I closed the session with my poem “Rooted and Growing,” celebrating that we don’t have to lose our identity to get the care we deserve.

Matthew McKenzie

Mental Health Carer & Forum Chair

National Ethnic mental health Carer Forum : November Update 2025

Chaired by Matthew McKenzie, Lived-Experience Carer

The latest meeting of the National Ethnic Mental Health Carer Forum brought together unpaid minority carers, community partners and four NHS mental Trusts (Avon & Whiltshire were kind enough to be included to update) to explore progress toward the Patient & Carer Race Equality Framework (PCREF), share challenges, and elevate lived-experience voices. As always, I ensured the space remained honest, fast-paced and rooted in what truly matters to ethnic minority carers: being heard, understood and included.

My latest blog for the November forum captures key highlights from each Trust, along with questions raised by attendees, reflecting the critical concerns and lived realities that continue to shape PCREF work across the country.

1. Avon & Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership Trust (AWP)

Focus: Triangle of Care, PCREF oversight, carer champion roles.

Avon & Wiltshire outlined how their PCREF programme is being driven through a clear governance structure, including a central Oversight Group and locality-based meetings. These layers ensure that learning from communities and staff filters upward and influences whole-trust priorities. Their collaboration with Nilaari (I think that is what their called), a long-standing community organisation supporting racially marginalised groups, has been key in grounding their PCREF work in authentic community voice.

A central pillar of their presentation was the strengthening of the Triangle of Care and carer-related PCREF oversight. They recognised that carer involvement cannot rely on goodwill or isolated champions; it requires structurally defined roles, written responsibilities, and consistent organisational expectations. The Trust is working on ensuring that every team and ward embeds a carer champion, whose purpose is not to “do everything for carers”, but to support cultural change within the workforce so that carers are recognised as equal partners.

They emphasised the importance of building staff capacity in cultural humility and safe conversations about race. AWP acknowledged that staff often feel unprepared to discuss ethnicity, discrimination or identity with carers. To address this, the Trust has created psychologically safe internal spaces, particularly for racially marginalised staff—to process experiences and explore how structural and interpersonal inequalities impact both staff wellbeing and patient care. This cultural environment is foundational to PCREF implementation because it shapes how confidently staff engage with diverse carers.

Key Points:

  • Carer champions must support, not replace, teams in working with carers.
  • Emphasis on psychological safety for racially marginalised staff and carers.
  • Encouraging honest conversations around race, trauma, and culture across staff teams.

Questions raised by attendees:

  1. How do you embed cultural awareness within staff teams, not just for carers?
    – Concern that staff dynamics and cultural differences must be addressed to create consistent culturally responsive care.
  2. How do staff and leaders hold ‘difficult conversations’ about race and safety?
    – Attendees wanted clarity on how psychological safety is practiced and how managers are supported.

🌟 2. Birmingham & Solihull Mental Health NHS FT

(Children & Young People’s Division – “Co-STARS” programme)

Birmingham & Solihull (CYP) presented one of the most detailed and emotionally grounded PCREF programmes, shaped heavily by lived-experience research with Black diaspora families. Their PCREF priorities, knowing our communities, transforming with communities, and delivering care that works reflect a commitment to embedding cultural responsiveness at every step. Their partnership with the University of Birmingham and Forward Thinking Birmingham has produced the Co-STARS project, a blend of lived-experience-led community work and staff training modules.

A major part of their PCREF advancement comes from working intensively with families to capture how racialised parents feel when using services. The Trust shared powerful testimonies from Black carers who described needing to “emotionally self-regulate” in meetings to avoid being labelled angry, unstable or cold. Parents also highlighted the emotional labour of protecting their children from stereotypes such as the “angry Black boy”, as well as fears of being adultified or dismissed. These insights have directly reshaped responses from clinical teams and informed the development of carers’ passports and safe spaces.

Birmingham & Solihull also emphasised building structures to ensure that their care pathways become culturally competent and adaptive. They are embedding PCREF champions across all clinical pathways, from eating disorders to psychosis and autism, ensuring diversity and inclusion principles shape every aspect of assessment, treatment and review. The Trust is also developing e-learning on culturally responsive practice, and expanding identity-specific support spaces (e.g., Black Carers Groups and new plans for Asian carers’ spaces). This multi-layered approach reflects a commitment to PCREF that is both structural and deeply relational.

Key Points:

  • Embedding culturally competent conversations within CYP teams.
  • Developing a Black Carers Group and safe spaces for racialised parent groups.
  • New e-learning on culturally responsive practice (from Co-STARS package).
  • Use of carer passports to ensure carers feel like equal partners.
  • Strong focus on how ethnic minority parents feel judged or misread by services (e.g., “angry Black woman,” “cold mother”) – themes drawn directly from carer focus groups.
  • Recognising adultification, stereotyping, and the emotional labour families perform.

Questions raised by attendees:

  1. What about older adult Black communities?
    – Carers questioned how older Black adults, shaped by decades of racism, would be included in PCREF work.
  2. Are you working with the police on cultural awareness?
    – Concerns around disproportionate use of Section 136 and stereotypes (e.g., assuming someone is “aggressive” because they speak loudly or gesture).
  3. How will parent–carer voices shape service pathways and outcomes across all diagnoses (e.g., autism, psychosis)?

3. Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust

Sussex Partnership presented PCREF as a three-pillared programme: data, co-production & engagement, and workforce development. Their first priority is improving ethnicity and protected characteristics data, which they acknowledged has historically been inconsistent. Sussex is launching a behavioural-change campaign that involves interviewing service users from minority backgrounds about why they may decline to share ethnicity, alongside staff interviews to understand documentation issues. Their goal is a transparent baseline from which meaningful PCREF action can be driven.

The Trust also described significant investment in a new data infrastructure via Power BI dashboards. These tools will pull together real-time information on areas such as restraint, Section 132 rights, and involuntary detention by ethnicity. The Trust stressed that PCREF cannot function without high-quality data because inequalities must be clearly visible and accessible to teams at every level—from ward managers to executive boards. Their future ambition is to enable quicker identification of disparities and faster interventions that prevent harm.

Sussex’s strongest focus was on building genuine co-production through their Expert Delivery Group (EDG). Unlike past approaches where community partners were only consulted, the EDG is designed as a collaborative decision-making space. Sussex acknowledged up front that phase 1 of PCREF planning did not fully embody equal partnership, and committed to ensuring that phase 2 will be co-produced from the ground up. The EDG will define what co-production means, co-design PCREF implementation plans, and shape updates that reflect community priorities, trust recovery, and anti-racist aspirations.

Key Points:

  • A behavioural-change campaign to improve ethnicity data recording (currently 65% compliance).
  • Development of Power BI dashboards for rapid inequality analysis.
  • Defining anti-racist and cultural competency skills for staff, tied to new EDI training.
  • Creation of the Expert Delivery Group (EDG) as a collaborative community–trust space.

Questions raised by attendees:

  1. Is this “real” co-production or consultation?
    – Attendees challenged Sussex on whether the initial plan was created with the community or presented to them.
  2. How will service users and carers hold equal power within co-production?
  3. How will your anti-racism ambitions be demonstrated externally to communities?
    – Attendees expressed concerns that staff training alone does not reassure communities.
  4. How will carers’ needs be embedded in PCREF (Triangle of Care)?

🌟 4. Kent & Medway Mental Health NHS Trust

Presenter: Kamellia (with contribution from Harriet – Lived Experience)

Kent & Medway showcased a comprehensive and governance-driven PCREF structure supported by their Equity for All Assurance Group. The Trust has embedded health inequalities into its broader strategy and is working to ensure that PCREF, protected characteristics data and health equity are woven into everyday practice. With the Trust’s newly updated name and identity, PCREF sits at the centre of a renewed commitment to equitable access, outcomes and patient experience across Kent and Medway.

Their PCREF progress includes delivering cultural competence training to 259 senior leaders, a significant investment in shifting leadership behaviour and expectations. They have also identified major data disparities in areas such as complaints, where ethnicity recording is only around 30%. To address this, they are rolling out the About Me form across their clinical system (Rio), which streamlines demographic and protected characteristics documentation for both carers and patients. This step is being supported by staff training designed to build confidence in discussing sensitive identity-related topics.

Kent & Medway also highlighted the expansion of their new Involvement & Engagement Team, which links directly with communities across East, West and North Kent. They are testing a Health Inequalities Toolkit, improving carer experience data collection, and creating new Family, Friends & Carers forms that capture protected characteristics, communication needs, and whether a carers pack was offered. The Trust’s approach is detailed, structural and long-term, aiming to embed PCREF as part of “business as usual” rather than a separate initiative.

Key Points:

  • 259 senior leaders trained in cultural competence.
  • New About Me demographic/protected characteristics form launching trust-wide.
  • Major data gaps identified (e.g., only 30% ethnicity data for complaints).
  • New Involvement & Engagement Team connecting with community groups.
  • Testing the Health Inequalities Toolkit .
  • New Family, Friends & Carers Information Form including carer-pack tracking.

Questions raised by attendees:

  1. Do you provide information in languages other than English?
    – Carers stressed that if translations don’t exist, PCREF is inaccessible from the start.
  2. How will carers be supported to attend meetings given their unpredictable caring responsibilities?
  3. How will you gather demographic data for carers when many do not have Rio records?
  4. How will minority groups be reached in areas where the Trust’s population is overwhelmingly White British?

5. Carer Support Organisation (Kent & Medway Carers Support)

Presenter: Donna Green (involve Kent)

Key Points:

  • They run trust-wide carer experience groups and targeted workshops.
  • Emphasised difficulty for carers to attend meetings due to constant demands.
  • Highlighted the need for multiple approaches, including creative well-being sessions.

Closing Reflections from the Forum

I wrapped up the session acknowledging:

  • The strong desire across Trusts to improve PCREF delivery.
  • The pressure to progress quickly without losing sight of lived experience leadership.
  • The need to bring CQC into future meetings for transparency around expectations.
  • The importance of ethnic minority carers having a forum that values honesty over polished presentations.

Final Thoughts

This month’s forum demonstrated that while progress continues nationally, there remain shared challenges across NHS Mental HealthTrusts:

  • Recording ethnicity and protected characteristics meaningfully
  • Embedding anti-racism beyond training modules
  • Meeting the needs of Black, Asian and other racialised carers
  • Co-production that is real, not rhetorical
  • Involving carers whose time and emotional capacity are already stretched
  • Ensuring safety, trust and humanity in every interaction.

Above all, the session showed that ethnic minority carers are not passive observers they’re leading, questioning, shaping and insisting on accountability at every step.

Ethnic mental health Carer Forum : October Update 2025

By Matthew McKenzie, Facilitator, National Ethnic Mental Health Carer Forum

Introduction: A Forum that Connects and Challenges

As the facilitator of the National Ethnic Mental Health Carer Forum, I never take for granted how special these sessions are. Each month, carers, professionals, and researchers from all over the UK log in to share knowledge, raise awareness, and push for change in how mental health services understand and support ethnic minority communities.

Our October 2025 session was a powerful one. Falling on the last day of Black History Month, it brought together crucial themes on race equality, co-production, research, and carer visibility.

We heard from two key areas shaping mental health equity right now:

  • The OSMOSIS Project, led by Dr. Jacqueline Sin and Sharon Galliford, focusing on developing social care-based support for carers of people with psychosis.
  • The Patient and Carer Race Equality Framework (PCREF), presented by Aboobaker Bhana, Equality and Involvement Manager for South West Yorkshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust.
Continue reading →

Ethnic mental health Carer Forum Update March 2025

The Importance of Ethnic Minority Mental Health Carer Voices: Empowering Unpaid Carers from the Global Majority by Matthew McKenzie

In today’s world, the voices of ethnic minority carers in mental health services must be heard and valued. The National Ethnic Mental Health Carers Forum meeting, held on March 28, 2025, underscored the vital role that co-production and lived experience play in shaping better services for those who care for loved ones with mental health needs.

Continue reading →