The Power Threat Meaning Framework (The PTMF) is a framework ‘articulated’ in a 400+ page document, created by a number of psychologists and non-experts as an ‘alternative to more traditional models based on psychiatric diagnosis‘.
This section could legitimately begin and end with the statement that the PTMF is incoherent, and therefore deserves no more attention. Despite its length, the authors have failed to provide a logical or cogent argument to support whatever it is they are trying to promote. However, given this piece has been supported, funded, and promoted by the BPS, it is worth mentioning a few other points.
- Since the BPS is a charity, it is obliged to be politically impartial – however, contributing funding to such a document is clearly not an impartial move.
- While attempting to claim that it does, the PTMF has no legitimate evidence to support it (again, breaching the BPS’ own guidelines regarding psychology being a scientific discipline). Given that it aims to offer an alternative to current frameworks and classifications, it does so based on lack of evidence, no peer review, and no consultation from others within the profession.
- The points that can be discerned from the associated documents attempt to dismiss years of evidence-based, effective treatment.
- Despite concerns having been raised about the PTMF by fellow psychologists, these have been dismissed by the authors and the BPS has continued to promote the framework.
- Similarly, complaints have been made by service users, and again, these have been ignored, and the framework promoted by the BPS regardless.
- The PTMF document is explicitly racist, sexist, and dismissive/hostile towards a number of groups including men, white people, straight people etc. Again, this is in breach of the Equality Act and HCPC/PSA guidelines.
- The PTMF group have also been producing a number of resources which are explicitly racist (again, under the auspices of the BPS).
We think it is noteworthy that the only review of the PTMF that we could find raises the same issues as we do. While we don’t necessarily share the entire perspective, or agree with all the points in the article, the concerns raised about the PTMF match our own. To read the review, see here.