Latest news with #AnnaFreud
The Guardian
6 days ago
- The Guardian
Freud Museum faces call for inquiry over bullying and board misconduct claims
A bitter row at the Freud Museum in London has resulted in it facing calls for an official investigation into allegations of political interference and 'autocratic' board decision-making that critics say put the future of the institution at risk. The museum, in Hampstead, was the final home of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and his daughter Anna Freud, a children's psychoanalyst, and is dedicated to promoting their intellectual and cultural legacy. A 20-strong group of writers, academics and psychoanalysts – including Susie Orbach, Hanif Kureishi and Marina Warner – have called for the charities regulator to investigate what they allege to be 'serious issues' with the management and governance of the museum. These include claims the museum's board has alienated staff, promoted a divisive and partisan approach to psychoanalytic practice in breach of the museum's charter, and attempted to block visiting speakers for 'political' reasons. 'We are concerned that the historic role of the museum, the importance of the house and its collections, its commitment to scholarship and research as well as the interpretation of contemporary society through a wide-ranging psychoanalytic lens, is being undermined,' the group said in a letter to the Charity Commission. The group who call themselves 'friends' of the museum, and include former trustees, directors and current honorary fellows, allege an intimidating atmosphere has led to a third of the museum's staff leaving in the past year. The letter, seen by the Guardian, claims the museum is effectively run in a 'divisive' and 'unhealthy' way by a small clique of trustees in contravention of the principles of good charity governance. 'Many of us have worked at or with the museum since its opening in 1986, and there has simply never been a comparable degradation of staff-board relations or any comparable efforts to run the museum in an autocratic and partisan way.' Speaking on behalf of the Freud Museum board, a trustee, Susanna Abse, told the Guardian it disputed the allegations, which it called unevidenced and unsubstantiated. She said it had written to the friends with an offer of mediation. 'We have nothing to hide. There are no secrets, no special agenda,' she said. The Freud Museum has itself filed a 'serious incident' report with the Charity Commission – effectively asking the regulator to check the board is compliant with its legal duties and assess its handling of the row. Charity trustees are required to file 'full and frank' serious incident reports to the regulator where they have concerns that an adverse event risks significant harm to the charity's staff and beneficiaries, finances or reputation. Sigmund Freud lived in the house in Maresfield Gardens for the final year of his life after fleeing the Nazis in Austria in 1938. The house, which has been largely preserved as it was then, contains his famous consulting couch, voluminous library, and collection of antiquities. The house became a museum in 1982 and holds regular exhibitions, tours, seminars and conferences, as well as running educational outreach programmes with the aim of bringing ''psychoanalytic ideas to life' for the wider public. Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Although the friends group first raised issues with the board by letter in January and formally met with trustees to discuss them in March, it called for the regulator to intervene as it feels its concerns have not been adequately addressed. Last year the museum was criticised by pro-Israel lobbyists after it hosted an event by Red Clinic, a group of pro-Palestine radical psychoanalysts unaffiliated to the museum. The museum did not cancel the event, saying it had simply rented out the space. The friends group claims that a planned lecture at the museum by the philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler – noted for her trenchant views on the Israel-Gaza conflict – had been delayed at the behest of the board. Abse confirmed this, adding that in common with many institutions it had to respond to pressure from both sides of the debate. 'It is not the business of a museum to promulgate any one view and we have to manage that,' Abse said. She said the museum had been 'caught between a rock and a hard place' on the issue. Other signatories to the letter include the philosopher Slavoj Žižek, the novelist and academic Jacqueline Rose, the psychoanalyst and writer Adam Phillips, Butler, and two former directors of the museum, Carol Seigel and Michael Molnar. Current honorary fellows of the museum who have put their names to the letter include the psychoanalyst and academic Darian Leader – also a former trustee – and the writer Lisa Appignanesi. Orbach is also a honorary fellow. The museum is recruiting a new director after the departure of Giuseppe Albano in May. The friends group said that 'in this current unhappy climate' the board's governance issues should be addressed before a successor was appointed. A Charity Commission spokesperson said: 'We can confirm that, in line with our guidance, the Freud Museum has filed a serious incident report relating to a dispute with an external group. We are assessing information to determine if there is a role for the commission.'
The Guardian
7 days ago
- The Guardian
Freud Museum faces inquiry over bullying and board misconduct claims
A bitter row at Freud Museum in London has resulted in it facing an official probe into allegations of political interference and 'autocratic' board decision-making that critics say put the future of the institution at risk. The museum, in Hampstead, was the final home of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and his daughter Anna Freud, a children's psychoanalyst, and is dedicated to promoting their intellectual and cultural legacy. A 20-strong group of writers, academics and psychoanalysts – including Susie Orbach, Hanif Kureishi and Marina Warner – have called for the charities regulator to investigate what they allege to be 'serious issues' with the management and governance of the museum. These include claims the museum's board has alienated staff, promoted a divisive and partisan approach to psychoanalytic practice in breach of the museum's charter, and attempted to block visiting speakers for 'political' reasons. 'We are concerned that the historic role of the museum, the importance of the house and its collections, its commitment to scholarship and research as well as the interpretation of contemporary society through a wide-ranging psychoanalytic lens, is being undermined,' the group said in a letter to the Charity Commission. The group who call themselves 'friends' of the museum, and include former trustees, directors and current honorary fellows, alleges an intimidating atmosphere has led to a third of the museum's staff leaving in the past year. The letter, seen by the Guardian, claims the museum is effectively run in a 'divisive' and 'unhealthy' way by a small clique of trustees in contravention of the principles of good charity governance. 'Many of us have worked at or with the museum since its opening in 1986, and there has simply never been a comparable degradation of staff-board relations or any comparable efforts to run the museum in an autocratic and partisan way.' Speaking on behalf of the Freud Museum board, trustee Susanna Abse told the Guardian it disputed the allegations, which it called unevidenced and unsubstantiated. She said it had written to the Friends with an offer of mediation. 'We have nothing to hide. There are no secrets, no special agenda,' she said. The Freud Museum has itself filed a 'serious incident' report with the Charity Commission – effectively asking the regulator to check the board is compliant with its legal duties and assess its handling of the row. Charity trustees are required to file 'full and frank' serious incident reports to the regulator where they have concerns that an adverse event risks significant harm to the charity's staff and beneficiaries, finances or reputation. Sigmund Freud lived in the house in Maresfield Gardens for the final year of his life after fleeing the Nazis in Austria in 1938. The house, which has been largely preserved as it was then, contains his famous consulting couch, voluminous library, and collection of antiquities. The house became a museum in 1982 and holds regular exhibitions, tours, seminars and conferences, as well as running educational outreach programmes with the aim of bringing ''psychoanalytic ideas to life' for the wider public. Sign up to Headlines UK Get the day's headlines and highlights emailed direct to you every morning after newsletter promotion Although the Friends group first raised issues with the board by letter in January and formally met with trustees to discuss them in March, it called for the regulator to intervene as it feels its concerns have not been adequately addressed. Last year the museum was criticised by pro-Israel lobbyists after it hosted an event by Red Clinic, a group of pro-Palestine radical psychoanalysts unaffiliated to the museum. The museum did not cancel the event, saying it had simply rented out the space. The Friends group claims that a planned lecture at the museum by philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler – noted for her trenchant views on the Israel-Gaza conflict – had been delayed at the behest of the board. Abse confirmed this, adding that that in common with many institutions it had to respond to pressure from both sides of the debate. 'It is not the business of a museum to promulgate any one view and we have to manage that,' Abse said. She said the museum had been 'caught between a rock and a hard place' on the issue. Other signatories to the letter include the philosopher Slavoj Žižek, the novelist and academic Jacqueline Rose, the psychoanalyst and writer Adam Phillips, Butler, and two former directors of the museum, Carol Seigel and Michael Molnar. Current honorary fellows of the museum who have put their names to the letter include the psychoanalyst and academic Darian Leader – also a former trustee – and the writer Lisa Appignanesi. Orbach is also a honorary fellow. The museum is recruiting a new director after the departure of Giuseppe Albano in May. The Friends group say that 'in this current unhappy climate' the board's governance issues should be addressed before a successor is appointed. A Charity Commission spokesperson said: 'We can confirm that, in line with our guidance, the Freud Museum has filed a serious incident report relating to a dispute with an external group. We are assessing information to determine if there is a role for the commission.'
The Guardian
19-05-2025
- General
- The Guardian
Modern parenting is rejecting abusive ways of punishing children. Will England listen?
A new trend is circulating on social media where adults ask their children to complete some of the toxic parenting phrases they remember from their own childhoods. Sayings such as 'I'll give you something to ... [cry about]'; 'children are to be … [seen and not heard]', and 'I brought you into this world … [and I can take you out of it]' are reconfigured by a new generation of little kids who have been raised in more loving and respectful ways. 'I'll give you something to …' one parent asks, as their child replies 'help you with'. 'Children are to be … children' and 'I brought you into this world and … made you happy'. It's powerfully moving, seeing how this generation of parents are trying their best to break the cycle of abuse that has frequently masqueraded as discipline over previous decades. And for good reason. Being shouted at can alter a child's brain, and the mental health consequences of having hostile, demeaning or humiliating words used against you in childhood can be lifelong. '[Verbal abuse] can profoundly shape our sense of self and whether we feel lovable and confident in navigating an unpredictable world,' Prof Eamon McCrory, chief executive of the mental health charity Anna Freud, told MPs last month. 'As a clinical psychologist, I see in my clients how childhood messages – both negative and positive – shape who they become.' Reading this makes me feel even worse about the few times I have raised my voice in frustration with my son, but parents have to wrestle with these debates all the time, not to mention reflect on their actions even years later. This month, Michelle Obama admitted that she used to smack her daughters. 'It took a couple of spankings for me to be like, yeah, you know what, this is a little kid and the fact that I can't think of any better way to get my point across than to smack somebody on the butt, I felt embarrassed,' she said. I admire her for speaking out, and for not using the sort of self-justifying language that many adults now do when reflecting on how they punished their children. I've heard many victims of such punishments minimise them, too. Whenever anyone says: 'I was smacked, and it didn't do me any harm,' I always think: 'But it did, because you are standing there, saying those words, justifying what is ultimately a cruel and abusive act against a child.' The idea that people who love us and try to do their best by us can also sometimes hurt us is a very difficult thing to contend with. Older people sometimes roll their eyes at this generation's gentle parenting methods – the phrase 'you're making a rod for your own back' is deployed to the point where it's become a cliche – but like it or not, the shift to more child-centred methods is a backlash to the kind of stern parenting that came before. I wasn't raised being shouted at, or hit – but lots of my peers were. That smacking continues to be legal in England and Northern Ireland (it is illegal in Scotland and Wales) never ceases to pain and surprise me. This is despite multiple calls from charities, children's rights experts and, most recently, leading paediatricians to make it unlawful. There will no doubt be those who are reading this who feel uncomfortable with what I am saying about punishment. Some of you will feel guilty, and others perhaps, angry. I expect some of you may feel even more uncomfortable about what I am going to say next, which is that verbal and physical punishment are a children's rights issue. 'Smacking is one of the very few things in parenting where you can say absolutely 100% this is not good for children, either children in the future, or in terms of how it makes children feel now,' says Eloise Rickman, the author of It's Not Fair, a manifesto for children's rights. Children's rights experts use the term adultism to describe the ways in which adults deploy power and rules against children. It's a concept that many adults find highly challenging, but when you open your mind to it you realise how conditioned we are to treat children as 'less than', and how normal we feel it is for adults to have full control over children. Children hate to be shouted at and smacked. It upsets and frightens them. But how often in a discussion about it do we hear their voices? How often are their thoughts and opinions centred? Rickman believes that England is an especially inhospitable country when it comes to parents and children, and I agree with her. It isn't just the pressures that parents are under – from housing to childcare – but the way our communities respond when parents and children are out in public. If you live in a place where, if your child starts crying, you receive sympathetic and supportive looks and comments, offers to help, and expressions of solidarity, you are much less likely to become stressed and raise your voice, or feel that you have to 'perform discipline' than you will in a place where you'll get tuts and judgmental comments. Parenting in the UK can often feel more like the latter than the former. I'm still not sure why: is it a legacy of Victorian values? A stiff upper lip thing? Whatever it is, we need a fundamental shift, and that requires knotty conversations beyond just 'we should ban smacking', which of course should be illegal. There needs to be a debate about how we can best support parents, and what it means to live in a society that values children, as opposed to one where the idea of children's rights is treated as a bit of a joke. Why is it assumed that our voices matter more than those of children, that we should be the ones in power? The UK has signed up to the UN convention on the rights of the child, but we haven't embedded it into English law. We should examine why that is. As we speak, Rickman and I get talking about Italy, a famously child-friendly place where a crying child would be more likely to solicit the sort of solidarity I mentioned earlier, and how their child-centred Reggio Emilia educational approach arose as a direct response to fascism. In the context of the global rise of the far-right, perhaps it's worth thinking about how anti-fascism begins at home, with the most vulnerable group of people of all, and how living anti-authoritarian values means not forcing children to be obedient, shouting at, or hitting them. Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett is a Guardian columnist
ITV News
16-05-2025
- Health
- ITV News
School pupils need supporting to show 'more grit', says education secretary
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson spoke to reporter Lewis Denison for ITV's news platform for teenagers, the Rundown. Secondary school pupils need more grit, the education secretary has told ITV News, as she announced more mental health support for students in England. Bridget Phillipson said one in six secondary schools will have access to a mental health professional by March next year, rolling out the support to nearly one million extra pupils. The education secretary said the support will make sure young people are "really well prepared for the world to come". "It's about what people call grit or resilience, or just being able to deal with life's ups and downs. "There are lots of challenges for today's young people, different to the challenges when I was growing up, and It's about making sure they're really well prepared for the world to come. "It's about actually giving people the chance to open up, to talk about what might be, what might be affecting them." Asked if rather than creating gritty young people, mental health support would build a "generation of snowflakes", the minister said: "The evidence is clear that if people if young people feel happy and supported in school, they feel like they belong here, they actually do better at school, so they get better academic outcomes. She added that by 2030 the aim is that every secondary school pupil in England will have access to the support, as part of a drive to improve school attendance. Research has found that poor attendance has a direct impact on a pupils' attainment, future earnings and life chances. According to the government, pupils persistently absent in secondary school end up earning £10,000 less at age 28 compared to those with strong attendance. The government said an extra £680 million in funding will be used to recruit an additional 8,500 mental health workers to support both children and adults. Health and Social Care Secretary Wes Streeting said: "Facing mental health problems when you're young can hold you back in school, damage your potential and leave you with lifelong consequences. It's devastating and it's got to change. "That's why this government is bringing in vital services to schools, so they can intervene early, support pupils, and help prevent conditions from becoming severe. "Backed by an extra £680 million in government funding this year, we are transforming mental health services for children – hiring more staff, delivering more talking therapies, and getting waiting lists down through our Plan for Change – so children can have the best possible start in life." The government also announced it had commissioned mental health charity Anna Freud to carry out research into the progression of teenagers over a five year period. It will follow 8,000 secondary school pupils to assess the challenges they face at home, school and beyond and closely examine their mental health and educational attainment. Ministers say the study will help identify and understand important gaps between groups in attainment and mental health so the government is in a better position to be able to tackle them. The study's lead professor, Jess Deighton, told ITV News she's hoping to find insight around the inequalities across England's education system. "For example, we know that young people who have experience of poverty certainly experience more difficulties in terms of reaching their educational potential. And also they're more likely to experience mental health problems and there are some challenges as well for children, young people with special educational needs. "So we're really hoping that the research will deliver some insights about how we can support those young people to be able to thrive and achieve."
The Independent
23-03-2025
- Health
- The Independent
Five years after lockdown, child mental health is still in crisis
Sunday March 23 marks five years since Boris Johnson declared the first UK lockdown, a moment that had a profound impact on us all. While the nation reflects on the pandemic's toll, it is our youngest citizens I feel particular concern for, through my role as chair of Anna Freud, a mental health charity for children and young people. The pandemic had profound and long-lasting effects on children's mental health. But, even before March 2020, children's mental health services in the UK were at breaking point. In 2017, one in eight children struggled with mental health issues. Today, it's a staggering one in five. While it did not create the UK's youth mental health crisis, the pandemic certainly intensified pre-existing challenges and created new ones that affected the mental wellbeing of young people. For many children, when schools closed and lessons moved online, daily routines collapsed. More than 40 per cent of 11 to 16-year-olds felt that lockdown made their life worse and almost seven in ten described poor mental health when returning to school. This has contributed to a sharp rise in persistent school absences, which has doubled since 2018. Those facing mental health challenges are three times more likely to miss significant school time. Perhaps most telling is the fact that the number of children and young people in contact with mental health services has more than doubled since 2018. These aren't just statistics, they represent real people waiting for help. Yet, lockdown was not universally damaging. Thirty-three per cent of children actually reported improved wellbeing during the first lockdown. For some, including neurodivergent children, a reduction in social pressures and more family time created unexpected benefits. Every child deserves the opportunity to thrive and fulfil their potential but it's clear that children need different forms of support. The solution isn't just pouring more money into treatment. We need a radical shift toward prevention and early intervention. Every pound invested in prevention, for example by promoting wellbeing, building resilience or addressing risk factors such as poverty, yields multiple pounds in savings not just in healthcare costs, but in improved educational outcomes, higher workforce productivity, and reduced pressure on criminal justice systems. The scale of this challenge demands collaboration from multiple actors – notably MPs, policymakers and funders – to support schools and charities, who are at the forefront of tackling the mental health issues faced by young people. Let's start with government. As it stands, only one per cent of the NHS budget supports children's mental health services. Despite spending £239 billion on healthcare in 2023, only about £3.5 billion went to preventative public health measures. Mental health received just three per cent of that prevention budget. Meanwhile, childhood trauma alone costs an estimated £42.8 billion in England and Wales every year. This isn't just financially irresponsible, it's morally indefensible. Schools also need better support to build young people's mental health and wellbeing. At Anna Freud, we adopt a whole-school approach to address mounting challenges and deliver the Schools and Colleges Early Support Service, providing online one-to-one sessions for students, while also supporting staff, parents and carers. We must stop treating children's social and emotional development as an optional extra. It should be a foundation of our education system, alongside academic achievement. As well as action by government and schools, civil society is also key to driving meaningful change. We are part of the Our Wellbeing, Our Voice campaign through #BeeWell, a coalition of organisations advocating for a national wellbeing measurement programme, urgently needed as UK young people report the lowest life satisfaction in Europe. Closing wellbeing gaps could also generate £82 billion in benefits annually. Half of mental health conditions start by age 14, with many developing in the early years (0-5), while adolescence sees another sharp increase in mental health problems. Any effective strategy must address these critical windows with targeted support. We are starting to see real progress being made. The government's 10-year health plan signals a critical shift from treating illness to promoting wellbeing by moving care from hospitals to communities, making better use of technology, and focusing on preventing sickness rather than just treating it. Five years after the first lockdown, we can see that the pandemic exposed our young people's vulnerability and resilience. Now is the time to build a system where no child falls through the cracks. This means resources, certainly, but also, pioneering new ways to support young minds. As we outlined in our 2024 Thinking Differently manifesto, the UK needs a comprehensive mental health prevention strategy – with input from diverse groups of children and young people – that spans government, schools and the charity sector. The stakes couldn't be higher. Not just for our economy, but for several generations counting on us to get this right.
