• There is a Critical Psychiatry Conference on the 13^th June 2003
• Social Perspectives Networks are an organisation interested in researching alternative issues compared with mainstream research - they are organising a conference. Although there was considerable interest within the meeting about a representative from SPN coming to a CMHF to do a talk.
• The next Maudsley debate is on the 21^st May, the June debate is cancelled and on the 16^th July David Healy will be on the panel debating 'Happy Pills'.

There was feedback from:

• The Hearing Voices Conference which seems to have been well received.
• Pastoral Care … (sorry can't remember the rest of the title) conference: the theme was on hospitality (links with sanctuary) and spirituality. Overall it was a good day.

• A concern about co-ordination & communication - particularly with reference to whether the email system is effective - was raised.

• A suggestion was make that a reminder about how the Planning Group system works might be helpful.

• Additionally it was discussed whether an overall co-ordinator was needed for the Planning Group.

• There was an acknowledgement that although there has been some difficulties, there has been a number of successful talks.

• It was established that speakers at the CMHF do not get any payment.
• ROOM HIRE - As rooms can only be booked one month in advance at the YMCA it was noted that it is difficult to plan speakers more than one month in advance.
• Room hire has gone up to £31/ two hours. It was suggested that we find an alternative venue, there was some discussion about approaching the Museum Tavern about booking some space once a month. The Betsy Trotwood at Farringdon was also proposed.

OUTCOME:

• Janet has volunteered to compile a list of possible talks to be held at the CMHF, which will be followed by a group email to the whole CMHF to identify speakers.
• Des agreed to draw up a list of all the possible tasks that need to be carried out by the Planning Group - with a view to designating specific tasks to specific members of the Planning Group.

Other discussions:

• A point was raised by a member of the group that she would like the opportunity to talk about her experiences and she hoped that this would be a supportive and safe environment to do so. There was some discussion about having small group discussions about personal experiences at some of the CMHF meetings.
• There was a general discussion about whether there should be a 'go around' at the start of the group when people could introduce themselves and say a little about their background - some people raised the issue that it was difficult to know who were mental health workers. Although it was acknowledged that there are specific issues about trying to create a forum for service users/survivors and mental health workers it was generally felt (as was agreed in the beginning of the CMHF meetings) that people did not want to do introductions.
• It was raised that we need to respect each other's reasons for being at the CMHF and that any labels (worker or survivor) can create unhelpful assumptions.
• It was felt that going to the pub after the meeting provided a good opportunity for people to get to know each other more socially.
• There was some discussion about the merits of small verses big group discussions - it was felt that a combination of the two would best suit individual preferences.

• It was felt that updating the original ground rules would ensure that the CMHF continued to feel like a safe space to talk.
• Dave volunteered to make the new amendments - which will be emailed in due course.