Today’s Times Argus has a good story on the ways in which mental health organizations and professionals are insisting on transparency regarding pharmaceutical company money that they accept, and in some cases cutting ties with pharmaceutical reps entirely.

Washington County Mental Health[...]Director Paul Dupre said the organization began restricting pharmaceutical access in 2003 and a year later stopped accepting grants to support its budget. Dupre said the atmosphere in the office has changed dramatically from the past, when drug company representatives would show up a few times a month and peek inside the medicine drawers to check what was in stock.

“We don’t let them leave their pens or papers here anymore,” Dupre said, who added that like UVM, the mental health organization still hears educational offers from the industry.

I’m glad to read that there’s this level of attention and awareness regarding the effects of accepting corporate money in the mental health professions. The work is supposed to be about best serving those in need of the services. There’s an inherent conflict of interest in allowing a pharmaceutical company, who’s first interest is turning a profit, to define what constitutes an effective treatment. Drug companies know that all the “free” stuff they hand out in clinics and doctors’ offices effect prescibing patterns–that’s why they do it.

It would be interesting to know more about just how the atmosphere has changed at WCMH–tracking such changes in clinics around the country would make a good research project–but for now I’m just glad to see the changes taking place. The end of the article is particularly worth noting, also:

…pressure to sever ties with the drug industry first came from outside the mental health field, but increasingly the demand for reforms are coming from within.

“The whole relationship is in flux right now,” [Weker] said. “What may have been viewed as appropriate at one point, is now seen as highly inappropriate.”

There’s another example, in other words, in which the advocacy and agitation of people on the outside has influenced those on the inside as to the wisdom of their concerns and position.  Also worth noting: that means there have been years’ worth of efforts that were little publicized if publicized at all.  The more of those stories we can bring to the light of day, the more information–and inspiration–available to others to help make similar changes wherever transparency and accountability are needed.

Kudos to all who are involved in brining about such change, and here’s to more of the same.

Peace.

Deborah Alicen