LAUSR

Background The PREVENT policy introduced a duty for health professionals to identify and report patients they suspect may be vulnerable towards radicalisation. Research on PREVENT’s impact in healthcare is scant, especially on the lived experiences of staff. Aim The purpose of this study was thus to explore the experiences of dissenting NHS staff who have undergone PREVENT training. Methodology This study examined individual interviews with 16 dissenting NHS health professionals who participated in mandatory PREVENT counter-radicalisation training. Results Results reveal two themes central among dissenting health professionals. The first theme is the moralising discourse experienced within PREVENT training. This moralising discourse offers that criticism towards PREVENT may be perceived as paramount to sympathies for terrorism itself and is experienced more acutely by British Muslim healthcare staff who felt silenced. The ‘morally correct position’ then is to unquestioningly accept PREVENT policy. The second theme relates to the structures which extend beyond PREVENT but nonetheless contribute to the silencing of dissent: distrustful settings in which the gaze of unknown colleagues stifles personal expression; reluctant safeguarding leads who admit PREVENT may be unethical but nonetheless relinquish personal responsibility from the act of training; and contemporary socio-political conditions affecting the NHS which overwhelm staff with other concerns. Conclusion This paper argues that counter-terrorism policy within the NHS may exacerbate the self-censorship of dissenting staff, unveiling novel concerns for medical ethics.