Thanks to Melinda Hutchings I read a blog by the director of the Eating Disorder Resource Centre, Dr. Judith Brisman.  Her blog discusses the possible role of family functioning in the development of eating disorders.  You can read her blog here.

She begins to allude to the concept of an "anorexicogenic family" where features of the family, particularly "enmeshment" and "overcontrol" were thought to be related to the development of an eating disorder.   As Dr. Brisman points out, the studies that described this were methodologically flawed and therefore inconclusive at best, and damaging to families at worst.  The concept seems similar to the "schizophrenogenic" family pattern that used to be thought to "cause" schizophrenia.  That is of course until we discovered that schizophrenia is a biological illness.  Dr. Brisman points to some studies indicating a biological basis to anorexia, but I will talk about those in a later post.

Dr. Brisman is correct when she asserts that ALL families, not just those with children with eating disorders, present with a combination of psychopathology, and strength and resiliency.  However, lets take those 1000 families that she wants to see in a research trial and then lets give their child a potentially chronic and life threatening disease.  We could choose an illness like leukaemia.  These families, I would boldly predict would demonstrate features like closeness and pulling together ("enmeshment") and maybe also try to control their distress in front of their child ("emotional overcontrol") and be worried about their child's activities and behaviour ("behavioural overcontrol").  I dare say these parents would demonstrate emotions and behaviour in line with an adjustment disorder, worry  and anxiety ("psychopathology").  

If we also treated these families as if they somehow caused the leukaemia (even if we didn't quite know how) and isolated them from the process of treatment, I suspect the parents behaviour may appear to be even more "pathological".  

My point is that we as clinicians (and as society) have a negative bias when it comes to mental health and we look for pathology where we would not in a medical condition.

Now, eating disorders are not quite like leukaemia are they.  Patients with leukaemia do not want their illness as someone with anorexia may appear to.  They will not fight against parents to help them.  They will not act to undermine treatment.  Thus, the parents of a child with an eating disorder are also faced with the egosyntonicity of the illness.  This feature of the eating disorders increases the difficulties parents face.  The frustration of wanting to help someone who actively resists help can be overwhelming for clinicians, let alone parents.  I suspect this part of the battle increases what we may see as "pathology" in the family.

So, Dr. Brisman's study not only needs to take 1000 families, but also needs to take into account the effects of having a child with a life threatening illness, the stigma of mental health, difficult access to treatment, and a child who resists treatment.  Given these conditions I would love to study the family that does not react in a way that could be considered as 'pathological'.   I strongly suspect that the family features that are seen to cause eating disorders are caused by a natural reaction to the trauma of  having a child with an eating disorder.  The research backs this hypothesis up.

Families are an important resource for treatment, particularly in children and adolescents.  The outcome of  patients treated with Maudsley Family Based Therapy is a testament to this.  We are currently looking at ways to increase support for parents whose children are suffering from the eating disorders to decrease there feelings of guilt and blame, and to increase their effectiveness into helping their children overcome these insidious diseases.


If you would like to comment on this feel free to do so on our Facebook page.
 
 
Picture
What just happened. I went to bed before the budget knowing that I could do my best to treat patients with eating disorders in line with the guidelines that we know to be scientifically valid.  Under the original "Better Access" Scheme, patients could typically receive 18 sessions of treatment subsidised by Medicare.  When I woke up after the budget this rebate had been cut to 10 sessions.  Now the government had based this figure in part on data produced by my professional body the Australian Psychological Society.  This data indicated that most patients were receiving about 6 - 8 sessions of therapy before the completion of their treatment. Only about one percent of therapists were using upto 18 sessions with their patients.  I think that 1% may have been me.  The other 99% must have not been seeing patients with eating disorders.

Lets look a little at the treatment of people suffering from eating disorders and why we have a problem.

The eating disorders are amongst the most serious psychiatric disorders.  Eating Disorders effect up to 10% of Australian women.  Anorexia Nervosa is the third most common chronic illness effecting adolescent women.  It has the highest mortality rate of ANY psychiatric illness, with 20% of patients dying from the illness after a prolonged history.  Matched for age, patients with anorexia nervosa have a death rate five times higher than the general population.  Death from suicide is relatively common, being 32 times higher than expected than in the general population (for comparison, patients diagnosed with major depression are 20 times more likely to die from suicide).

The Eating Disorders are often chronic and debilitating illness. On average, patients with Anorexia Nervosa have a similar level of disability to those suffering from Schizophrenia and Borderline Personality Disorder. In a systematic review of the literature eating disorders are shown to have one of the highest impacts on health related quality of life of all psychiatric disorders.  Cost of treatment per year for Anorexia Nervosa is as expensive as that required for schizophrenia.  Data from the private hospital system indicates patients with eating disorders are the most expensive patients to treat in a hospital setting. This is due to the complex psychiatric and physical comorbidity, the protracted length of treatment, and the requirement of specialist care. 

We know that patients who have access to the empirically supported evidence based approaches provided by specialist services have a significantly improved outcome.  This is particularly so for those who are able to access these treatments early in the course of their illness.

There are two well validated outpatient treatments for patients with the eating disorders, Family Based Therapy for Anorexia Nervosa, and Cognitive Behaviour Therapy for Bulimia Nervosa. 

The treatment of the eating disorders is complex and often protracted. The treatment manuals for both FBT and CBT indicate that the number of sessions recommended for treatment 20 treatment session over a 6 - 12 month period.  This is of course the problem.  We had 18 sessions, which almost fitted in with what works.  Now we have 10 session.  This is half the recommended course of treatment. (Actually, I'm not sure 18 was ever really enough but that is an argument for another time {I suspect now in the distant past}. I'm not going to mention the problems of FBT under the current legislation).

The government’s recent reduction of this figure to 10 sessions is woefully inadequate for my patients needs.  The reduction will result in fewer patients accessing appropriate treatment within an adequate time frame.  Outcomes from the eating disorders will deteriorate and the personal, social and economic burden from the eating disorders will increase.  

So, what to do ......
 I am a great advocate of accept what you can't change AND trying to change something that you can do something about.  There was a move to remove Social Workers from the Medicare Scheme which was reversed die to public pressure.  I am hopeful that the same can happen here.

Lift what you want from what I have written above and send an email to the Minister for Health and Ageing Nicola Roxon and Minister for Mental Health Mark Butler

Lets not forget the Greens (whom I've heard are supportive of my position)
bob.brown@aph.gov.au                      
and the independants
senator.xenophon@aph.gov.au            

senator.fielding@aph.gov.au                

Peter.Dutton.MP@aph.gov.au             

Mark.Butler.MP@aph.gov.au             

Tony.Windsor.MP@aph.gov.au

robert.oakeshott.mp@aph.gov.au

Lets get active to support the effective and affordable treatment of eating disorders.  I know I have.


Chris Thornton
Clinical Director 
The Redleaf Practice.