SCA practice case · Video consultation

“Nobody helps me, I can’t cope, and I’ve been hurting myself — you’re my last hope, you have to fix this now”

Video consultation Adult patient Hard Mental health & addictionUrgent & unscheduled care

The candidate brief

This is what you would read in the 3-minute window before the patient connects. Read it once, note two or three hypotheses and one thing you must not miss, then stop.

Patient
Robyn Easton · 26 years · female
Setting
Video consultation — a distressed patient in crisis with self-harm.
Past history
  • Emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder
  • Recurrent self-harm
Medication
  • Check repeat record
Allergies
None recorded
Recent notes
⚠ Video request today: cutting again after relationship breakdown; “I can’t cope”.
Reason for contact
“You’re my last hope. You have to fix this now.”

Practise this case

The full case is in the Hot Seat with the Gold plan. You get a 12-minute timer, a role-player script with facts released only when asked, examiner checkpoints by the three RCGP domains, a model consultation and the guidance behind it.

What this case tests

Show the learning points (spoiler: read after you have practised)
The EUPD-in-crisis consultation requires holding genuine VALIDATION/empathy and careful RISK ASSESSMENT together: the patient’s distress is real and overwhelming and must not be dismissed, while the recent self-harm (method, intent, escalation), current suicidal ideation/intent/plan/means, protective factors and immediate safety are assessed directly (without risk scales or low/medium/high labels, NICE NG225) — statements like "I don’t know what I’ll do" explored with sensitive, specific suicide-risk questioning. Recognise the patterns of EMOTIONALLY UNSTABLE (BORDERLINE) PERSONALITY DISORDER — emotional dysregulation, fear of ABANDONMENT (here a relationship breakdown), chronic emptiness, impulsivity, recurrent self-harm, and IDEALISATION/devaluation (the clinician as "the only one who understands") — without stigma, because understanding the pattern guides a measured response rather than panic or rejection. Avoid BOTH extremes: under-reacting/dismissing risks missing genuinely elevated risk, while over-reacting (reflexive admission, escalating medication) can be unhelpful or harmful and reinforce unhelpful patterns — assess each presentation on its merits and respond proportionately, recognising self-harm as often a way of coping with unbearable emotion. The critical skill is maintaining COMPASSIONATE, CONSISTENT BOUNDARIES: you cannot "fix it now" or be the sole rescuer, and saying so KINDLY (without rejecting) is therapeutic; avoid being drawn into idealisation/SPLITTING ("the good clinician versus everyone who gave up"), model reliability within clear limits, and avoid promises you cannot keep — boundaries with warmth, neither warmth without limits nor limits without warmth. Make a collaborative SAFETY/CRISIS plan (coping strategies, crisis-line/crisis-team contacts, means safety, follow-up, CMHT involvement per risk) and reinforce the evidence-based treatment — structured PSYCHOLOGICAL therapies are the mainstay (NICE CG78: consider a comprehensive DBT programme for women for whom reducing recurrent self-harm is a priority; MBT is a specialist-service option not recommended in CG78), while medication is NOT first-line for EUPD itself (treat comorbid depression/anxiety, avoid reflexive sedatives/polypharmacy in crisis) — ensuring continuity. The hidden agenda is unbearable pain, abandonment fear and a need to be heard and held safely, not an expectation of an instant cure; validate and contain, manage risk, hold boundaries, signpost the right treatment/team, and preserve continuity — neither rejecting nor rescuing.

The guidance behind it

Similar SCA cases

Browse all 359 cases by experience group →

gpreasoning.uk is not affiliated with or endorsed by the RCGP. Our cases are original teaching material written for practice; none is an exam recall. For anything official about the SCA, check the RCGP SCA pages.