|
Abstract
|
On Feb 24, 2022, Ukraine was invaded by land and air. As of 1450 CET on March 1, no word or statement about the unfolding events or their impact on mental health is expressed on the websites of several psychiatric organisations, including the World Psychiatric Association, the American Psychiatric Association, and the Asian Federation of Psychiatric Associations. Others, such as the European Psychiatric Association, issued valuable statements several days after the irruption. I believe that psychiatric associations around the world have a moral obligation to timely condemn--individually as well as collectively--the current violence. In addition, they should voice concerns about the possible implications of this war for mental health, without the need of becoming politically involved.
First, timely responses from psychiatrists around the globe to a large-scale assault on human physical and psychological integrity is potentially instrumental to curtail mental health consequences of violence. These days, speeches by world leaders centre around geopolitical and physical effects of the bloodshed. Although the effectiveness of timely statements by psychiatrists might be unclear, pointing policy makers and citizens to mental health implications of war could help to tailor appropriate responses to this infringement of territorial integrity. For example, statements from psychiatrists can prompt politicians to discuss the physical and mental health effects of war in their speeches, which can help to delineate the potential scope of this tragedy. As a result, timely psychological aid might be incorporated into general medical aid when deploying medical teams to war zones. The latter, in turn, would be conducive to early interventions that can help to lessen the burden of acute and post-traumatic stress disorders.
Second, psychiatric organisations represent psychiatrists on their continent or in their country and have become more socially involved over recent years, as can be appreciated by their reporting on the COVID-19 pandemic. None of these organisations should remain silent when it comes to a potentially large-scale threat to mental wellbeing--the population of Ukraine is over 44 million. By issuing an early, possibly short statement condemning the violence and pointing to the potential mental health consequences at stake, these organisations can play a pivotal role in mapping the scope of the current threat.
Third, although each psychiatric organisation has their own interests, a short, collective statement with content similar to that of the previous paragraph is likely to have a larger impact than individual statements, simply because of the unified, global voice.
Finally, fear in psychiatric organisations of appearing to become politically involved when standing up against violations of sovereignty is understandable. Nonetheless, by focusing on the mental suffering and by refraining from polarised blaming, I believe constructive, empathetic, and non-political statements are viable...
Language: en |