This week the BBC’s moral maze  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/moralmaze)  provocatively asked about the role of individual conscience and whether people act less morally when they are unseen,  This came  on the back of scientists possibly having invented a Harry Potterish  ‘invisibility cloak’ capacity to become invisible by bending light etc. The program raised crucial matters relevant to issues currently in the news,  such as the banking scandals and what the likes of Bob Diamond  felt they should be able to ‘get away with’, as well as the shocking behaviours in mid-Staffordhsire NHS trust and in care homes where elderly residents were  abused. The 2 key issues  being debated were whether we need more regulation (eg of banks or hospitals) or   should moral acts by led by individual conscience, because externally imposed ‘targets’ and expectations in fact make people less personally motivated to do the right thing. These are thorny issues.

A couple of very interesting studies came out in the last few weeks which might surprise those who believe that monetary and material success is the best way to health and happiness. One huge new study is just published by the American Psychological Association. This was led by Lara Aknin [1] who has done a massive amount of research on altruism and wellbeing. Amazingly this found a positive relationship between personal well-being and spending on others in 120 of 136 countries covered in the 2006-2008 Gallup World Poll. The survey comprised 234,917 individuals, half of whom were male, with an average age of 38. The link between well-being and spending on others was significant in every region of the world, irrespective of factors like income, social support, perceived freedom and national corruption.

A government document, called,  in 1984 style double-speak ‘More Great Childcare’  is suggesting that it is fine to increase staff-child ratios for childminders and nurseries (click for link to document) .  This is a huge worry to many who work with children and families, and particularly those who work in the area of infant and child mental health.  The proposals have sparked a huge wave of protest, including one petition which had a week ago already attracted over 20,000 signatures (see report).

This week once again issues of how to care for the elderly have hit the headlines with government announcements about how future care is likely to be funded. It is interesting that the primary focus in most media reports tends to be about ‘cost’ of such care, and there is a constant message about the ‘burden’ of the elderly. We know of course that the proportion of elderly people living alone has been increasing in recent years in the UK and US. We also know that living alone hugely increases the chances of suffering from depression. Research has also shown, over many years, that increased longevity and better health go with elderly people having higher levels of social contact, and in particular belonging to more clubs and organizations, for example people who are more embedded in social groups  living longer after strokes and heart attacks. The elderly do better and are healthier if they are well integrated into communities.

This week we learnt that the suicide rate in the U.K. has dramatically increased. It is of course male suicides that remain far higher  (18.2 per 100,000 compared to  5.6 per 100,000) and male suicides are at their highest level for 10 years.  Those most at risk are men in their 30’s and 40’s.

Of course, while this is a mental health issue, it is very linked to the serious downturn in the economy. International studies have shown that rates of suicide are, for example, very linked to unemployment rates eg http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00127-010-0275-2?LI=true.

One study of rates in 35 countries found, for example that males were particularly vulnerable to fluctuations in the labour market, but that suicide rates also decreased in countries where there was higher per capita health spending http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00127-010-0316-x?LI=true.

This week we learnt that even the government has admitted that the new squeeze on benefits is likely to push another 200,000 children into poverty  (http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/17/benefits-squeeze-200000-children-poverty).

Almost every week studies come out showing the impact of poverty and economic stress and hardship on psychological health.  One very interesting study which is about to be published [1] has shown very clearly that children born onto worse economic circumstances are likely to have a different psychological makeup through their lifespans. This research is based on Life History Theory, propounded by many evolutionary psychologists and researchers such as Jay Belsky. The science seems to be showing that if we are born into an environment where stress, anxiety, fear or trauma are likely, then we live a ‘faster life course’, and for example, breed earlier, take more risks and also die younger and have worse health.