Not a secondary issue: Preventing and resolving financial difficulties for people in secondary mental health care

• Context
• The study
• Key findings
• Points to consider

Context

People experiencing a mental health crisis or living with a severe mental illness often receive care and treatment via secondary mental health services, such as Community Mental Health Teams or psychiatric hospitals. In England, 2.1 million adults were in contact with secondary mental health services in 2019-20. While these services can have a hugely positive impact, most do not address the links between money and mental health. Previous research has demonstrated how the cognitive and psychological effects of mental health problems can limit capacity to manage finances and disrupt ability to attend work and maintain benefit claims. These challenges can result in financial difficulties and hinder recovery.

The study

The study comprised a survey of 191 members of the Money and Mental Health Research Community, a group of thousands of people with lived experience of mental health problems, between 17 December 2021 and 11 January 2022. It explored the experiences of people who have received care from secondary mental health services, how their finances fared while receiving the care, and the help they received or would have benefitted from. The authors also drew on findings from an online survey of 5,001 people with experience of mental health problems, conducted in the summer of 2021 by research company Opinium, and interviews with experts. The study was conducted by the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute, a charity that aims to break the link between mental health problems and financial difficulty in the UK. The study was also supported by the mental health charity Mind.

Key findings

The key findings from the report included the following:

• Experiencing an income drop while receiving secondary mental health care is commonplace. For the majority of respondents (60%), their income fell because they could not work while acutely unwell.
• Keeping up with bills while acutely unwell is impossible for many people in secondary mental healthcare. More than eight in ten (86%) of respondents experienced financial harm while under secondary mental health care – with seven in ten (72%) reporting that they struggled to pay for essentials, such as food and heating.
• There are gaps in the financial support people want and the support they receive while under secondary mental health services. Eight in ten (81%) respondents found that their crisis or relapse prevention plan did not mention personal finance – with four in five (79%) feeling that help in managing their finances would have led to a better outcome.
• Only half (53%) of respondents who had received treatment from Community Mental Health Teams had disclosed how their financial circumstances were impacting their mental health

Points to consider

• Methodological strengths/weaknesses: The report does not contain a section that sets out the methodology.
  • One of the limitations is that both survey and expert interview participants were drawn from a research community managed by the Money and Mental Health Policy Institute for people living with mental health conditions. We can’t know whether this group differs in any systematic way from others who are not members of the group. Only 191 people completed the survey which means there will be a margin of error (unstated) around the results; for some questions, the base is less than 100. The report isn’t clear about whether any other experts were interviewed – the experts cited in the report are all ‘experts by experience’ drawn from the group. The report also uses data from a survey of over 5,000 people but gives no further information about this study.
• Applicability: This report will be of interest to government, regulators, policy makers, financial institutions and support agencies as well as anyone working with people living with mental health conditions.
• Relevance: This report is extremely relevant given the ongoing cost-of-living crisis which will no doubt worsen the situation for people living with mental health conditions.
• Generalisability: We can’t generalise to other people with mental health conditions as those who join a community focused on finance may have a different perspective or different experiences from those who don’t. However, the results can be taken as a good indication that these issues exist in the wider population.