.

I first met Dr. Levy during my Fellowhip in Psychosomatic Medicine at State Universtiy of New York , Downstate Medical Center in Brooklyn, New York where he was a senior attending on the Service of the reknowned medical researcher Dr. Franz Reichsman. During this time Dr. Levy collaborated with Dr. Eli Friedman, a leading nephrologist. Dr. Levy became the first researcher to identify and write about the connection and interaction of mind and body in patients with kidney disease many of whom were receiving dialysis. He ultimately wrote two books on this subject as well as numerous journal articles and chapters in various books. He also put together several international meetings on this subject where nephrologists, psychiatrists, psychlogists, social workers and nurses from all over the world presented papers and exchanged ideas .

Dr. Levy then came to New York Medical College in Valhalla, New York where he became Director of Consultation Liaison Psychiatry and he put together a team of which I was very pleased to be a member.

After several years there he returned to Brooklyn where he was elected Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry at State University of New York well as a Life Fellow of the American Psychiatric Association.

After many years on the east coast Dr. Levy relocated to Los Angeles where he has maintained a private practice until very rececently when he retired.

He enjoys spending time with his wife Belle and receiving visits from his son and 3 daughters and his grandchildren. By coincidence my wife Susan and I ended up in Los Angeles so we are able to enjoy time together with Belle and my dear teacher, colleague and wonderful friend.

I was very forutnate to have met Dr. Levy, early in my career and to have had him as teacher and mentor and then throughout the years work with him as a colleague. Now in our later years I am able to enjoy visiting with him as a dear friend and share our memories and the pleasures of growing old in beautiful Southern California.

Happy 90th Birthday Norman!

Michael Blumenfield, M.D.

(Dr. Blumenfield is the Sidney E. Frank Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at New York Medical College and currently in private practice in Los Angeles. He is the author of a new book “ShrinkTalk” scheduled to be released in June)

The pandemic has progressed to the point where we are trying to figure out why people are refusing or are reluctant to get vaccinated.

Months ago, we were struggling with the question as to why people were refusing to wear masks when it was clear that doing so could save thousands of lives. There were also thousands of people who would attend “super spreading events” where numerous people would become infected and many would die.  I conceptualized this behavior as people using the unconscious defense mechanism of “denial” and I suggested that we label it “Fatal Denial.” I also suggested a plan to run “focus groups” to determine to whom the non-maskers might identify with and then  to recruit them for a massive public affairs campaign on TV, Internet, billboards etc.  (see earlier blog). Many of my colleagues expressed strong agreement with this conceptualization and recommendation although despite my efforts to bring this suggestion to political and media people, there were very few media presentations utilizing these ideas.

Now we are in a situation where we have a safe effective vaccine which is saving hundreds of thousands of lives.  However, there are a significant number of people who refuse to get vaccinated or are “vaccine hesitant.” Because of this type of thinking, there is no doubt that many people will become infected and many will die. It also will become much more difficult to achieve “herd immunity.” We are seeing many experts appearing on TV urging people to get vaccinated and trying to explain the scientific validity of the vaccine. Hopefully, this will convince some of those who are hesitant or refusing to get vaccinated. However, I believe we need a stronger presentation to break through the “fatal denial” that is operating with these people.

I suggest that with every statistical presentation on the various media of the number of new cases and number of new deaths from Covid 19, it should also be stated and published what percentage of those fatalities were not vaccinated! In addition, there should be an effort on the part of the media to recruit people who were Anti Vaxxers and then survived a bout with this terrible disease to tell their story and how they regret their refusal to get the vaccine. Also, there should be a sensitive effort to bring to the attention of the public the first-hand story of family members who lost loved ones to the disease who had been against getting the vaccine.

I understand that I am suggesting that we approach peopleâ€s personal feeling about death and dying and also try to bring peopleâ€s personal pain and grief to public exposure albeit with their consent and agreement. I do this because I also understand that denial, and in this case “Fatal Denial” is a very powerful defense mechanism which has to be dismantled in order to save thousands of lives.

Please see a recent video clip which illustrates the above points:

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/texas-man-declined-covid-19-vaccine-speaks-undergoing/story?id=78321152

I think it is interesting that most of us experienced our own  classical analysis and may have performed to varying degrees classical analysis where the patient lies on the couch and there is no eye contact with the therapist ! For many this was or may still be the gold standard.

Even when there is face to face therapy,  to many the proper approach is for the therapist not to reveal emotions through facial expression. To do so  could facilitate the development of a false transference etc etc. So now when we are forced to do remote therapy, I very much doubt that most therapists set up their screens so they are at least six feet away from their screen ( to reproduce the usual therapy setting ) or perhaps shut off their camera to do analysis in classical manner without patient seeing your face during the session. I believe that our profession has learned that we can come to understand transference in most settings, take into account and explore where our facial expression, objects in our office and information that the patient has obtained from the Internet will influence initial transference and use our techniques to interpret the patient perceptions and use analytic techniques to facilitate the therapy and help the patient.

 One more thought – for those of you who think that flat computer screen in just not realistic enough, please be aware that 3d realistic  Holograms are now available.See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IuNj_rqx04o

Michael Blumenfield, M.D.

(Dr. Blumenfield is the Sidney E. Frank Distinguished Professor of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at New York Medical College and currently in private practice in Los Angeles. He is the author of a new book “ShrinkTalk” scheduled to be released in June)

It has been about 4 months since I first wrote about “Fatal Denial” and how this unconscious psychological defense mechanism is leading to thousands of preventable deaths during the Covid-19 pandemic. Denial is a well known unconscious psychological defense that we use in many situations on a regular basis.  It is bolstered by another psychological mechanism of rationalizations such as a person accepting the idea that the need to wear masks is overblown, is a political issue or isnâ€t necessary if you are relatively young and healthy, etc. etc. The scientific facts and the reality are quite clear, in that the failure to wear masks and social distance is causing the continued increase in the number of Covid-19 cases and thousands of subsequent related deaths!!

The periodic and increased statements by scientists and health experts about the necessity to take these precautions apparently has not made any difference in this tragic situation.

I know that the people who are participating without masks and social distancing in public demonstrations and social gatherings do not want to get sick and die or cause loved ones to do the same. Nevertheless, the number of cases and fatalities continues to increase.

I have suggested that there is an approach to counter this trend which will utilize our understanding of the unconscious psychological mechanisms at play here. That would be to identify the “objects” (people) with whom the Fatal Deniers value and are their so-called heroes. This may be actors and actresses, sports figures, musicians and even in some cases politicians and other leaders. These people can be identified by running some “Focus Groups” (techniques well known to the advertising industry) with the “non maskers” who are utilizing “fatal denial”. These “heroes”( well known public figures) would then be approached and asked to participate in a massive public service outreach program that would include television, radio, Internet, billboards etc. in which they would plead with the public to save lives and wear masks, social distance etc. Also included in this public service outreach program would be segments with people who have lost loved because of COvid 19 perhaps some people who now realize how they have caused illness and death to loved ones by not taking the recommended precautions.

I have spoken to many colleagues in the mental health professions who agree with me in this analysis and suggested solution. I tried to bring these ideas to the attention of people who might be able to utilize them but so far have not made any progress. Such a program will require some financial support and hopefully cooperation of the media but surely it is worth any price.

(Dr. Blumenfield can be contacted at Mblumenfield@aol.com or at 818 564-4207)

The deadly Coronavirus epidemic continues to spread in my state of California and throughout     the country. Medical experts have clearly identified the reason that the epidemic is getting out of control is that a significant number of people are not listening to the medical experts and are not using facial masks, keeping social distancing nor are they following other precautions concerning opening businesses, restaurants, beaches, sporting and political events etc. Of course, these people do not want to get sick or spread this illness to their loved ones. Such individuals are using a very common unconscious psychological defense mechanism of “denial” to keep out of their consciousness that their behavior could be fatal to themselves and their loved ones. They support this denial with another well-known psychological defense mechanism known as “rationalizations”. Examples are, “I am healthy and wonâ€t get sick”, “These precautions by the experts are political in nature”, “You are only young once” and many other rationalizations. Because these are psychological defense mechanisms and they wonâ€t protect anyone from this fatal virus, I have coined a new term for this denial and am calling it “FATAL DENIAL.”

In order to overcome this “fatal denial” we must communicate the message to the deniers as coming from people with whom they have a strong positive identification. There are well known scientific approaches to determine who such people would be. This is the technique of running focus groups with a wide cross section of deniers. (The advertising industry is quite skilled at utilizing this method). During such meetings it would not necessarily be important to determine the rationalization that are used but rather the scientific inquiry would be to identify who are their role models and heroes among movie, tv, music, sports and even political stars. Once these names were identified, they would be approached and be invited to participate in a massive public service announcement campaign which would speak to the Fatal Deniers. There should be TV and radio ads as well as billboards and posters as well as a concerted campaign on social media which could be made available throughout the country. In addition to the “heroes” being the face and voice of these announcements, there also should be series of such announcements done by young and older regular people who have lost loved ones to the virus.

While I would hope that celebrities might donate their time and perhaps networks would also donate free time for these pieces, there still would be costs in making them and distributing them. I would hope that Governor or California and the state legislature as well as their counterparts in other states would be interested in supporting such a program. I know TV producers who would be skilled and capable of carrying out such a program and I would be willing to help in any way that I can. Perhaps such people as Bill Gates, Jeff Bezos and others might get behind such a life saving program and provide the financial support needed.

Psychiatrists and other mental health professionals deal with the defense mechanism of denial all the time. We know this to be a very basic defense mechanism which protects the individual from anxiety as well as from other painful emotions including depression. In the course of doing psychotherapy we chip away at this defense mechanism as we help the patient strengthen other methods of coping and dealing with the issues in their life. At various times all people will use a this mechanism as we usually donâ€t think about our mortality most of the time.

Currently during the COVID-19 pandemic we are seeing situations where many people are apparently using this defense mechanism as they choose not to wear masks, abide by social distancing and practice other behaviors which clearly endangers their lives as well as those of loved ones and other people. Watching the TV news, it is clear that this is quite common and wide spread. I am sure that these individuals do not believe they are truly endangering themselves or other people. They will use various rationalizations and will not or cannot acknowledge the life-threatening nature of their behavior. I believe that we should label this for what it is: “Fatal Denial.” Since the overwhelming majority of people who are using Fatal Denial are not in therapy nor are they motivated to be in therapy, we need to find a way to address this very serious problem.

The answer to this dilemma problem is to first personally and publicly identify the very dangerous mechanism that is widely being used. Mental health professionals need to take an active role explaining to the public how many people are denying a life-threatening situation by using Fatal Denial. Perhaps this can be done in conjunction with our medical colleagues who as a group have a generally trusted relationship with the public.  I would also like to see a nationwide campaign of public service announcements where doctors (perhaps psychiatric and non- psychiatric physicians)as well as other mental health professionals and nurses  appear on television expressing concern about the wide spread fatal denial that is leading to people not taking the proper protections and thereby endangering their lives and the lives of others including their loved ones.

In addition, trusted, popular  public figures (whether they be entertainers, sports figures or even politicians) should appear in a wide spread series of public service announcements on TV, billboards and posters strategically located such as at the front door of a supermarkets or other stores or restaurants urging those entering to wear a mask and socially distance themselves. The reality is that many people would be more influenced by such a poster than by the entreaty of the young person at the door of a store or a waiter or a lifeguard at a beach or even by a police officer, asking them to do the right thing.

As psychiatrists and physicians, we have to call Fatal Denial for what it is and what it means. We have to mobilize our profession organizations as well as the media to try to break through this deadly defense mechanism of Fatal Denial.  

Michael Blumenfield, M.D.

The Coronavirus epidemic has forced psychotherapists to see patients remotely as we are forced to follow social distancing and in many cases remain quarantined.  I and others have made the case that remote sessions via Zoom, Skype, FaceTime, Doxy, and other systems are not only a safer method to follow during this time of the dangerous epidemic, but under certain circumstances may be more effective than the patient and the therapist sitting across from each other wearing protective masks.  Remote therapy also eliminates travel time for the patient, which often is not only a safety factor during these times, but can be quite valuable as well as convenient for the patient.  I have advocated that as long as there is any health consideration, this method should be continued and have also suggested that when the health crisis has completely passed, therapists and patients may favor continuing the utilization of remote sessions.

However, as we consider making remote sessions the norm, we have to examine how changes in the method of therapy will impact our therapeutic techniques.   Particularly for those of us who are psychoanalysts or psychodynamic therapists, we will need to consider how utilizing remote sessions will impact transference and countertransference.  As we know, “transference” is the phenomena where the patient experiences feelings about the therapist, which originate in the patientâ€s childhood usually from feelings that one had for primary relationship in childhood most often from emotions related to his or her parents.  Often such feelings are initially identified by feelings that the patient had towards other people in the patientâ€s life, but frequently get more clearly expressed in the therapeutic relationship.  The transference relationship is usually facilitated by the therapist being a more or less “gray screen” meaning that the patient usually knows very little about the therapistâ€s personal life or actual personality.  There are exceptions in training programs where the therapist may be a teacher or may have a strong presence on social media.

Now with remote therapy, we have to take into account how the characteristics of remote therapy will influence the development of the transference, the distortion of it or the facilitation of it.  If the therapist chooses to hold the remote video session in a setting which reveals their personal life (i.e., showing personal photos in the background), that certainly could distort or at least influence the transference.  Obviously, this would be more likely to happen if children or other family members or even pets entered into the background of the setting.  The fact that many remote setups actually present much more of a close-up of each participantâ€s face could influence the emotional experience of the participants.  Also, the clothes that the participants are wearing, personal grooming or lack of it, will all influence the emotional experience of the participants.  Obviously, all the factors which delay or distort transference will also impact countertransference.  In situations where psychoanalytic therapy traditionally has the patient lying on a couch so they will not be influenced by the therapist looking at them, it would seem that a procedure would be developed where both participants after greeting each other would turn off their video setting.

I believe the transference and countertransference will definitely be influenced by remote sessions.  I am confident that all aspects of transference and countertransference will ultimately take place but they no doubt will be influenced by the nature and characteristics of remote therapy.  It will be incumbent that we use thoughtful observations how these may be barriers or distortions in transference and countertransference with this new method.

There is another aspect of how we use our new therapeutic experience to give us insight into the struggle of our patients.  During the current and apparently prolonged health crisis, social contact especially between single people has become limited to remote visits and this fact of life in many cases is limiting and distorting the emotional experience of these relationships and becomes part of the struggle of the patient.  It appears to me that the patients are uncertain how to evaluate their emotional attachments when the contacts are mostly or entirely via remote communication.  By examining the nature of transference in remote therapy, we will provide a method to give the patient insight into this new struggle.

I am sure there will be many papers and presentations which will be examining these issues.  At this time, I would welcome and invite any comments which you can write below.

As the coronavirus epidemic evolves, there is a variable amount of relaxing of requirements for quarantine, wearing masks and gowns, and keeping social distancing.  Particularly for the medical profession, there is more pressure on physicians to allow closer contact for physical examinations, blood drawing, and of course minor and major surgical procedures.  Despite everyoneâ€s best efforts, we all realize that relaxation of these measures will lead to a certain amount of transmission of the virus with subsequent illness and fatalities  (while we hope and pray for this not to happen).

As we progress towards the relaxation of these precautions, psychiatrists and other mental health professionals have been seeing patients via remote (usually video) techniques but also are considering returning to in-person face-to-face visits.  Psychiatrists particularly as part of the medical profession feel a certain obligation to offer their best possible treatment to our patients and to support our colleagues.  Many practitioners who have tried remote therapy believe that remote sessions are inferior to in-person sessions and feel an ethical obligation to resume in-person face-to-face meetings as soon as possible.  In my opinion, this is a serious mistake.  I believe that a careful consideration of all the factors will make a strong case for the maintenance of remote therapy sessions at this time and for this foreseeable future as long as there is the possibility of this deadly epidemic being present and perhaps beyond it.

Obviously, there are exceptional situations such as in consultation- liaison work, emergency rooms, certain crisis situations, drop in clinics, etc., although accommodations to maintain distant contact in these settings may be possible. There are also serious financial considerations to be taken into account, as remote sessions with patients may be reimbursed at a lower rate than face-to-face meetings.  This situation needs to be immediately addressed by our various professional organizations and by the government.

Only a limited proportion of our consulting and waiting rooms can truly allow for a proper social distancing and a maintenance of sanitized furniture for the numerous occupants who will use it.  We are often talking about two people sitting in a closed room probably barely six feet apart for perhaps 45 minutes directly facing each other and talking to each other (granted during psychoanalysis the patient faces away from the therapist while lying on a couch).

Many years ago, I asked an older supervisor (my age now), how he would feel if there could be a clear video connection and whether that could replace an in-person session.  He said (something to the effect) “if you cannot smell the patient, it is not going to be effective treatment.” Our current experience with telepsychiatry has certainly disproved that view.  Also if by some chance one or both of the participants in therapy are wearing a mask, certainly it is much less intimate than a crisp clear face on a large computer screen.  Also when medication needs to be prescribed, that can easily be done by phone, fax, or electronically.

In addition, we should also take into account the travel time (as well as the potential exposure during such travel).  I would estimate that the average patient spends at least a half-hour going one way from their location to my office in Los Angeles plus waiting room time.  That total of about  one hour certainly has value to the patient.  I should also add that everything stated above applies to group therapy.  Maintaining social distance for 6 to 10 people would require a very large room and telepsychiatry methods such as Zoom and other techniques have been proven to be very effective for group meetings.

In conclusion, remote telepsychiatry meetings are very feasible and effective and may very well save the health and lives of both the therapists and patients. There should be consideration of continuing this method of treatment throughout the full run of the coronavirus epidemic and perhaps into the future.  It is also essential that our professional organizations play a very strong role in advocating and encouraging this technique being used by its members and also take a very active role in advocating for equal reimbursement for treatment by these techniques.

      Addendum

I appreciate the thoughtful discussion that this blog has been generating among colleagues. It has led me to write this addendum.

In order for remote tele-therapy to be utilized with maximum effectiveness two conditions must be considered:

1. The patient and the therapist must be in a comfortable setting. In most cases this would favor using a computer or laptop screen as compared to a handheld i-phone. The participants would most probably be seated in a comfortable chair with or without earphones.
2.  It is essential that the session be taking place in a confidential manner. This may be difficult to achieve when the participants are at home and in a living or office environment with other people.

To the degree that these two conditions cannot be achieved, this would favor a resumption of in person face to face meetings when there is no longer danger to either patient or therapist of being infected by the deadly virus during travel to the session or during the in-person office visit.

Your comments are welcome below :

This presentation originally appeared as a Podcast at PsychiatryTalk.Podbean.com. Dr. Blumenfield can be contacted at MBlumenfield@aol.com

 The Coronavirus: Psychological Considerations with Special Emphasis on Psychological Support for Doctors, Nurses, EMTs, Other First Responders, Including Members of the Media and the Psychological Support Teams Themselves

Hello, Iâ€m Dr. Michael Blumenfield.

Todayâ€s podcast is going to address the psychological issues  of the victims and the potential victims of the coronavirus ,the  people caring for them such as the doctors, nurses, EMTs and other first responders,  the mental health professionals who are involved in supporting these groups and also the members of the various media, print TV, etc., who are also fully exposed to the psychological impact of this epidemic by the nature of their work

Of course every one of us is a potential victim of this life threatening disease. We know that if you are older or have a chronic disease, you are more susceptible and of course we know that transmission occurs by exposure to people who are infected. This knowledge creates conflicts about personal, travel and business decisions, which can be quite agonizing and guilt producing when there is a subsequent loss of business or personal opportunity, or if the decision leads to illness and potential fatalities. The nature of this disease often requires isolation and quarantine of people identified as being exposed to this illness. This situation, of course, can be quite psychologically painful to the person involved as well as to their loved ones. However, modern technology now allows the maintenance of face to face, relatively intimate contact via FaceTime, Skype etc. so people can mitigate some of fear, anxiety and depression of this situation. As will be described below group video meetings can be held vie Zoom

Any situation that changes a personâ€s usual interactions and travel patterns, increases the possibility that there could be a temporary hiatus in the renewal of their regular medication. This can be important when a person is taking essential medications for diabetes, heart disease and other illnesses. It can also be very important when people with mental symptoms run out of medications in such conditions as schizophrenia, other psychosis, bipolar disorder, anxiety panic and, of course, depression. This situation can be further exacerbated if pharmaceutical companies cannot get essential ingredients from international sources during a worldwide epidemic.  

Mental health professionals in the United States and in many other countries have established very sophisticated techniques for working with patients who have serious medical and even life threatening conditions as well as supporting the medical and   nursing staff caring for them. There is a subspecialty of psychiatry originally known as Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry which as now been subsumed under the particular specialty known as Psychosomatic Medicine.

Of particular note was the work by these specialists in dealing with the AIDS epidemic as well as with burn and trauma patients, cancer, heart disease and other illnesses. It should be noted that during the acute phase of illness, the ideal approach is for the patient or family members to meet individually or sometimes as a couple or family with a mental health professional when there were psychological issues. Sometimes, of course, clergy would be involved. At a later phase there might be referral to some specialized grieving group meetings with others who have lost loved ones.  Mental health professionals trained and experienced in this area of Consultation-Liaison may be particularly appropriate to take a leadership role in the delivery of services, especially  in running any groups.

During the AIDS epidemic there were often particular fears among medical and nursing staff of contracting the disease, especially  before the exact mode of transmission was understood. There were numerous other psychological issues for healthcare workers, victims and families. In situations where there were mass causalities such as after airline crashes and particularly during the World Trade Center 9/11 incident, where there were 1000s of deaths, there were many psychological issues for the families, the surviving victims and also for first responders including the psychological support teams themselves. More recently mass causality events ie. shootings or bombings have raised similar issues, many of which maybe similar to those that we will be seeing during this coronavirus epidemic.  

In the past, particularly prior to 9/11, the usual approach where there were believed to be large numbers of psychological causalities, particularly among the first responders, members of the media  or even among the psychological caregivers themselves, was to use the CISD (Critical Incident Stress Debriefing) approach. This is a technique where a specific group of people ie. doctors, nurses, EMTs,  members of the media or even mental health personnel, would meet in a group with a psychological consultant who would lead them in a discussion of the difficult experiences that they had been through. For example, after a plane crash or a terrible tornado, the police, firemen, EMTs or even reporters would recount the horrible, sights and sounds that they have seen. They might be describing seeing dead children or maimed victims etc. This technique was based a catharsis model which might encourage the participant to “ let it out”, tell about their experiences, nightmares, fantasies and encourage them to discuss how they thought about their own families and personal thoughts.  While such a technique might be helpful in an individual therapy or group therapy treatment dealing with less acute situations such as sharing a struggle with substance abuse, many experts soon realized that having each person recount their own painful horrific experience in this group setting, was usually not helpful.  In fact, to the contrary, such situations were more likely to intensify the anxiety, panic and worry of the other participants of the group. It is a different situation when someone in psychotherapy is reflecting back about a difficult time in his or her life and brings up some painful memory and then gradually lets down their psychological defenses. Or even in a group therapy situation, a person may recall a difficult memory or a current struggle and is getting the support of the other group members, most of whom are not struggling with very similar acute issues. The CISD model, although very well meaning, in my opinion was not effective. In fact, I believe it had the potential to magnify the problems of the other group members and sometimes would breakdown psychological defenses which were helpful at that moment.

This doesnâ€t meant that there is no value for specific groups to meet under the guidance of a mental health professionals but the approach, in my opinion, should be one that is supportive and affirmative. The group meeting with a leader might address several areas depending on the makeup of the group. There would usually not be any reason to mix the members of the group and. have first responders in the same group as the mental health professionals or clergy or reporters. If group work is being done, they should ideally each be in their own group.

Depending on the particular make-up of the group there are some  potential issues specific groups might address. As I will emphasize in the case of all group meetings and in many cases in individual meetings, because of the potential spread of the Coronavirus, remote face to face techniques should be considered and often will be the preferred form of meetings. Zoom is an excellent system for conferencing with individuals and small groups. Participants do not need have an account. They can see each other. One can also draw on a whiteboard for everyone to see.

Group Meetings Conducted By Mental Health Professionals with Police, Fire and EMTs, Doctors, Nurses and Other Identified Groups Such as Lab Technicians, Coroners Office , etc.  

When possible the groups should be homogeneous . Although they often work side by side, there are individual situations that each group deals with and there is often an esprit de corps that would suggest any such group meeting should be homogenous. As previously stressed, using remote communication methods, such as Zoom,  should be considered because of the nature of the contagious process that is confronting us. However, since these groups often do assemble regularly for assignment and briefings, a portion of that meeting might be assigned for discussion of mental health issues. That could include

1. A general review of symptoms that the people whom they are helping may be experiencing and review of resources available where they can refer any of the  primary victims who need such assistance. The medical providers should be reminded to check to see if their patients have adequate medicine supplies for any mental health or other medical conditions.

2. Stressing the importance of how the caregivers themselves  should be getting adequate sleep and when possible spending time with their families

3- When possible it is valuable to arrange for periodic acknowledgement by superiors or other government officials of the appreciation and value  of the work they are doing. This can be an important morale builder during difficult times Acknowledgment that it s not unusual for people in their position to have symptoms of anxiety, depression, bad dreams, etc. At the same time do not encourage group discussions of individual difficulties or psychological symptoms or problems that members of the group may be having  ( the CISD method).  Most important, would be providing contact information where they any individual can have a confidential meeting  with a  mental health professional..

Group meetings with  Mental Health Professionals Conducted by  Mental Health Professionals  Knowledgeable About Mass Trauma  

Mental Health professionals are usually comfortable working together and it would be quite appropriate to have psychiatrists, psychologists, social workers and mental health nurses all meeting together. As previously stated because of the contagious nature of the disease process, remote group meeting may be necessary or advisable..  If there are people who have experience in the consultation/liaison model of providing support to patients with serious illness and trauma as well as in support of medical and nursing staff, it would be appropriate for them to take a leadership role in this meeting.

1- In the initial meetings of this group, there would be the opportunity to access the mental health professional resources available and identify those with particular applicable  experiences. There would need to be a designation who would run sessions  for particular groups noted above  and who would be available for individual counseling or therapy sessions. Depending on contacts and relationships there could be designated mental health professionals who could reach out and offer support to various leadership people involved in the crisis situation including various agencies and the political leadership.

2- It would be appropriate for a designated experienced mental health professional  person to review  with the group, the nature of the psychological  problems that they are dealing with such as fear, anxiety, separation issues, depression, PTSD, grief, etc  which may be occurring in primary patients and their families. This would likely be something that the mental health professionals  are familiar with but some may not usually work in this area on a day to day basis . This review should include the approach to children and how to answer their concerns and questions in an age related manner. There also should be a discussion of importance of avoiding the CISD approach in a group setting, as previously discussed and encouraging those with significant symptoms to be referred for individual sessions.

3- Remind mental health workers of the importance of recognizing that needed medications for mental health and other conditions may be interrupted and consider if substitute prescribers can be provided and if emergency medication can be provided.

4-As there often is loss of life, it is valuable for the mental health professionals  have an alliance with clergy who can be helpful with acute grieving and general support for many people.

5- During these group meeting with mental health professionals, the importance of their valuable role should be reinforced . At the same time the potential impact on themselves should be acknowledged and there should be a method for any of them to have individual, confidential mental health support.

Group Meetings with Members of the Media Conducted by Mental Health Professionals

During the course of a disaster situation or a public health crisis, members of the media are usually totally involved on a full time basis. They become knowledgeable of the seriousness of the situation and the threat to life, sometimes even more so than the general public . They frequently interview the victims and their families as well as the various first responders and others knowledgeable about the seriousness of the crisis at hand. This group can include reporters, commentators, producers, camera people etc. A group meeting with them where there is an acknowledgement that it is not uncommon for them to have symptoms can be helpful at the same time reminding them that they play an important supportive role in the mental health of their audiences. As previously discussed, the CISD method should be avoided in group meetings but certainly individual confidential  counseling sessions should be available as needed .

I would like to conclude with a brief vignette concerning the important psychological role of the media in supporting the worried public at the time of a major incident

Shortly after the 911 World Trade Center Incident, I was scheduled to do a psychological debriefing with various members of the media and the night before I received a call from a family member. She told me she had a dream that a well known TV news personality was comforting her about this horrific event. In my meeting with the media people I used that story to show them how they provided emotional support as well as the news. At the end of my meeting one of the participants came up to me and told me she was senior producers for the network personality my relative dreamt was comforting her and she was sure he will be very pleased to learn he appeared in a comforting role in her dream in addition to providing the news. My relative was also very surprised and also comforted to hear here he would know about her dream

This presentation was originally presented  on a  podcast by Dr. Blumenfield (PsychiatryTalk.podbean.com). Dr. Blumenfield can be contacted at Mblumenfield@aol.com

Dr. Blumenfield is the Sidney E. Frank Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at New York Medical College and is currently in private practice in Los Angeles, Californria 

References :

Intervention and Resilience After Mass Trauma, Edited by Michael Blumenfield and Robert J Ursano, Cambridge University Press, 2008

Disaster Psychiatry (Chapter 18) in Psychosomatic Medicine by Michael Blumenfield and Maria Tiamson-Kasab, Wolters Kluwer, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2009