Working with the complexities of adolescent mental health problems: applying Time‐limited Adolescent Psychodynamic Psychotherapy (TAPP)

This article discusses the application in a CAMHS setting of a distinctive intervention for adolescent mental health difficulties, Time‐limited Adolescent Psychodynamic Psychotherapy (TAPP). TAPP has been developed specifically for working with adolescents and the characteristic developmental and psychosocial complexities they present to mental health services. It is widely recognised that supporting the developmental process in adolescence is central to therapeutic interventions and the therapeutic aim of TAPP is to enable recovery of the capacity to meet developmental challenges. The key factors of TAPP are described, including the formulation and working with a developmental focus, the therapeutic stance, working with transference and counter‐transference, working with time limits, and the emphasis on engagement of adolescents in therapy in TAPP. The experiences of introducing and developing TAPP in the CAMHS service are discussed with two brief and one extended case examples and this leads to a discussion of the kinds of outcomes achieved. It is concluded that TAPP is a key and relevant intervention for adolescents in complex and vulnerable situations; further work will be undertaken to continue its application in these settings and to formally assess outcomes.

Conspicuous by their abstinence: the limited engagement of heroin users in English and Welsh Drug Recovery Wings

Background In recent years, an abstinence-focused, ‘recovery’ agenda has emerged in UK drug policy, largely in response to the perception that many opioid users had been ‘parked indefinitely’ on Opioid Substitution Therapy (OST). The introduction of ten pilot ‘Drug Recovery Wings’ (DRWs) in 2011 represents the application of this recovery agenda to prisons. This paper describes the DRWs’ operational models, the place of opiate dependent prisoners within them, and the challenges of delivering ‘recovery’ in prison. Methods In 2013, the implementation and operational models of all ten pilot DRWs were rapidly assessed. Up to three days were spent in each DRW, undertaking semi-structured interviews with a sample of 94 DRW staff and 102 DRW residents. Interviews were fully transcribed, and coded using grounded theory. Findings from the nine adult prisons are presented here. Results Four types of DRW were identified, distinguished by their size and selection criteria. Strikingly, no mid- or large-sized units regularly supported OST recipients through detoxification. Type A were large units whose residents were mostly on OST with long criminal records and few social or personal resources. Detoxification was rare, and medication reduction slow. Type B's mid-sized DRW was developed as a psychosocial support service for OST clients seeking detoxification. However, staff struggled to find such prisoners, and detoxification again proved rare. Type C DRWs focused on abstinence from all drugs, including OST. Though OST clients were not intentionally excluded, very few applied to these wings. Only Type D DRWs, offering intensive treatment on very small wings, regularly recruited OST recipients into abstinence-focused interventions. Conclusion Prison units wishing to support OST recipients in making greater progress towards abstinence may need to be small, intensive and take a stepped approach based on preparatory motivational work and extensive preparation for release. However, concerns about post-release deaths will remain.