Search

In an era marked by escalating international crises, environmental shifts, and sociopolitical volatilities, global mental health is facing profound challenges. With its distinctive position at the intersection between clinical and judicial domains, forensic psychiatry can be predisposed to the consequences of adverse external determinants and events. At present, geopolitical conflicts, rising insecurities, climate change, forced and voluntary migration, and regressive sociopolitical ideologies are all compounding role responsibilities, care models, and ethical expectations across forensic-psychiatric practice; in short, complex distal factors are increasingly informing domestic considerations. These far-reaching concerns indicate a need for adaptive and proactive responses, underpinned by cultural sensitivity, social justice, and respect for human rights. Through illustrative examples from different regions, this perspective paper calls for a greater recognition of the transnational dynamics that are affecting local contexts of practice. Equally, it outlines the importance of advocacy, interdisciplinary collaborations, and potential evolutions in training and ethical frameworks to address contemporary issues. By adopting these approaches, forensic psychiatrists can promote more just systems and equitable mental healthcare for patients amidst the uncertainties of an interconnected and rapidly transforming world. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In electoral contexts, mental health topics have recently attracted sociopolitical relevance, influenced by policy developments, election-related psychopathology and popular discourse about individual candidates. Yet, whether this reflects generalised trends or is contingent on election-specific and contextual factors remains difficult to ascertain. Aims: This study sought to examine correlations between Google Trends (GT) data on mental health and four national elections in the US and the UK from 2008 to 2020. This was intended to yield preliminary insights into the relevance of mental health topics amongst voters and the potential impact of electoral cycles on patterns of online engagement with these issues. Methods: Monthly and daily Search Volume Indexes (SVI) were gathered from the 'Mental Health' category on GT in the US and UK from 2008 to 2023. SVI were evaluated around the past four national ballots, comparing election-year intervals and baseline data from the preceding year. Statistical tests were conducted to assess SVI and short- and long-term dynamics. Findings: The results showed heterogeneous SVI patterns related to mental health during elections in the US and the UK. In the US, there were statistically significant SVI increases proximal to the majority of elections as compared to data in the same calendar year, but these did not typically exceed baseline SVI. However, interestingly, divisive US contests showed correlations with several elevated SVI measures in the same and previous years. Conversely, there was a lack of consistent longitudinal trends in UK elections, perhaps informed by its disparate sociopolitical landscape. Conclusions: These findings underline the composite relationship between electoral politics and popular engagement with mental health topics around national votes, suggesting that this is driven more by situational factors rather than a recurrent electoral effect or signs of burgeoning engagement. Detailed research is required to understand the nuances and causality behind these dynamics and their wider implications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Throughout history, armed conflicts have profoundly affected individuals and societies, with recent events in Ukraine, the Middle East, and beyond bringing into sharp focus the severe mental health and humanitarian consequences of geopolitical crises. Such situations often result in mass fatalities, destruction, displacement, forced migration, and other critical life events. Amid these scenarios, the adverse outcomes for mental health and well-being in both the short and long term must be emphasized. As a conceivable example of the latter, the proposed concept of intergenerational trauma could have far-reaching implications. In particular, in certain regions, civilians have repeatedly experienced instances of violence and may have continually been exposed to critical life events and traumatic stress. In this context, the consequences of these events for individual well-being and global mental health will likely be registered for years to come. Accordingly, urgent help and actions to address the mental health burdens within contemporary conflicts should be accentuated in humanitarian, political, and diplomatic interventions. Equally, health policies must adopt a long-term approach to support initiatives under the purview of global and public mental health objectives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Geopsychiatry, a newly emerging discipline within psychiatry, examines the influence of geopolitical determinants on mental health and mental illness. Geopolitical determinants include conflict and wars, global austerity, climate change, public health crises (such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)), and migration. This study focuses on the two significant areas of climate change and migration. Climate change can affect mental health directly or indirectly in a variety of ways, including chronic (global warming) and acute (heat waves and environmental disasters) events. Certain groups of migrants, including migrating children, older migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, are particularly vulnerable to developing psychiatric disorders. The convergence of climate change and migration is significantly complicating the already highly difficult situation for mental health services worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where access to care is limited. Despite this, the majority of studies examining mental health impacts of these events originate from high-income countries, and there is still a lack of effective preventive and treatment strategies. In 2023, the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) set up a Special Interest Group on Geopsychiatry with a clear and explicit aim to summarize current evidence and propose strategies to tackle geopolitical challenges on mental health. The Special Interest Group aims to support regional and local groups across all psychiatric disciplines and stakeholders dedicated to building local consensus, prioritizing research, crafting policies, and collating and sharing good clinical practices. With such significant effort, we can expand our understanding and collaboration on geopsychiatry and make changes to the care of people with geopolitical and mental health challenges around the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article highlights the intersection of global mental health with the United Nations' Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), emphasizing the critical role of psychiatrists in addressing geopolitical challenges and promoting social justice. Topics discussed include the importance of mental health within the SDG framework, the impact of geopolitical uncertainties on mental health advancements, and the potential of geopsychiatry in guiding interventions and policies.

Geopsychiatry, a newly emerging discipline within psychiatry, examines the influence of geopolitical determinants on mental health and mental illness. Geopolitical determinants include conflict and wars, global austerity, climate change, public health crises (such as the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)), and migration. This study focuses on the two significant areas of climate change and migration. Climate change can affect mental health directly or indirectly in a variety of ways, including chronic (global warming) and acute (heat waves and environmental disasters) events. Certain groups of migrants, including migrating children, older migrants, refugees, and asylum seekers, are particularly vulnerable to developing psychiatric disorders. The convergence of climate change and migration is significantly complicating the already highly difficult situation for mental health services worldwide, particularly in low- and middle-income countries where access to care is limited. Despite this, the majority of studies examining mental health impacts of these events originate from high-income countries, and there is still a lack of effective preventive and treatment strategies. In 2023, the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) set up a Special Interest Group on Geopsychiatry with a clear and explicit aim to summarize current evidence and propose strategies to tackle geopolitical challenges on mental health. The Special Interest Group aims to support regional and local groups across all psychiatric disciplines and stakeholders dedicated to building local consensus, prioritizing research, crafting policies, and collating and sharing good clinical practices. With such significant effort, we can expand our understanding and collaboration on geopsychiatry and make changes to the care of people with geopolitical and mental health challenges around the globe.

Throughout history, armed conflicts have profoundly affected individuals and societies, with recent events in Ukraine, the Middle East, and beyond bringing into sharp focus the severe mental health and humanitarian consequences of geopolitical crises. Such situations often result in mass fatalities, destruction, displacement, forced migration, and other critical life events. Amid these scenarios, the adverse outcomes for mental health and well-being in both the short and long term must be emphasized. As a conceivable example of the latter, the proposed concept of intergenerational trauma could have far-reaching implications. In particular, in certain regions, civilians have repeatedly experienced instances of violence and may have continually been exposed to critical life events and traumatic stress. In this context, the consequences of these events for individual well-being and global mental health will likely be registered for years to come. Accordingly, urgent help and actions to address the mental health burdens within contemporary conflicts should be accentuated in humanitarian, political, and diplomatic interventions. Equally, health policies must adopt a long-term approach to support initiatives under the purview of global and public mental health objectives.

Background: This contribution responds to three articles (we refer to all three as 'editorials') concerning something called 'geopsychiatry'. Aims: To evaluate claims made in these editorials for 'geopsychiatry' as a new field of inquiry at the interface between geography and psychiatry. Method: Close critical reading of two editorials in the International Journal of Social Psychiatry – entitled 'Geographical determinants of mental health' and 'Political determinants of mental health' – and one in the International Review of Psychiatry – entitled 'What is geopsychiatry?' Results: While this geopsychiatry initiative is to be applauded, disquiet can be expressed about the almost complete neglect of a pre-existing domain of inquiry – 'mental health geography' or 'the geography of mental health' – that has long been researched by academic geographers and cognate scholars. Key trajectories in this field can be identified and related to the proposed foci for geopsychiatry. Conclusions: The hope is voiced that future developments in geopsychiatry will proceed in dialogue with the literature and practitioners of mental health geography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: This contribution advances claims about 'geopsychiatry from below', attending to how 'voices' with lived experience of mental ill-health speak about 'the geo' or, more specifically, 'place and space'., Aims: To explore relevant interdisciplinary literature for academic research, scholarship and commentary containing voices of experience speaking about the geo., Methods: An 'indicative' and 'facilitative' review of relevant transdisciplinary literature in arts and humanities and social science, alongside an exploratory workshop where materials are analysed and relationships detected and, provisionally, mapped., Results: The literature review discloses no coherent body of studies into the geo from below, but rather a fragmented amalgam of materials-field observations, primary quotes and occasional elaborations-that are rarely the direct focus of inquiry (except in some contributions by academic geographers). Combining the literature review and the workshop analysis, an outline series of prompts are developed for relating 'Kinds of Places', their associated 'Affective Qualities' and actual spaces and places on the ground., Conclusions: This study signals what a geopsychiatry from below might entail, providing important foundations for future transdisciplinary work on 'the geo' and mental (ill-)health.

In the article, the authors discuss the need for integrating geopsychiatry into foreign policy to address the multi-dimensional geopolitical mental health challenges worldwide. Other topics include how mental health is affected by transnational challenges like conflict, human rights violations, and fragile security, and the events that disturbed public order like persecution, conflict and violence.