21 November 2005                                                                                                                           

 

 

Keynote Address to the MHCA AGM

 

Senator the Hon. Lyn Allison, Chair of the Senate Inquiry into Mental Health

 

 

Thanks to the Mental Health Council for their briefings to the committee, advice, submissions, feedback, various reports, including Out of Hospital, Out of Mind and Not for Service.

 

The inquiry has received 550 submissions, 16 formal days of hearings, 3-4 to come and several informal visits and meetings.  Baxter, Port Hedland, Thomas Embling forensic hospital, Orygen.   We are due to report in the second week of March next year.

 

Examples of informal meetings – post natal depression group PANDA, gay and lesbian groups, Prof Rosen's mental health service in Sydney, also children whose parents have a mental illness, people with intellectual disability.  This Wednesday I will visit the Brisbane women's prison – the subject of fierce criticism from Sisters Inside about the seclusion of seriously ill women.

 

Our main findings: 

Mental health services in Australia are still very inadequate despite a decade of promising policy reform under the National Mental Health Strategy that was kicked off by the Burdekin Inquiry back in 1993 with its shocking expose of the neglect and abuse of the mentally ill.

 

Not for Service - the title drawn from the formal categorisation used in Victoria for those who are sick but not sick enough for their state to be life-threatening - says it all. 

 

The evidence provided to the Senate mental health inquiry is that seriously ill people are routinely triaged away from public hospitals in every state.  Those who are admitted are typically out a day or two later having received no treatment other than stabilisation of their medication, and no follow up support. They soon return to the revolving door of the A&E department and some become a suicide statistic.  The inquiry has received dozens of letters from parents and carers outlining the tragic story of their son or daughter or spouse’s failed efforts at getting services, being turned away again and again and ending up dead.

 

It doesn’t have to be this way.  Isolated examples of sensible, humane practice exist but they are almost always under threat.  In our report I want to spell out those good practices so people who don't have access to them can demand to know why not. 

 

The collaborative model set up in Shepparton, Victoria is a good example.  Here the Mental Illness Fellowship teamed up with the Area Mental Health Service to provide safe accommodation to people with high support needs for rehabilitation, re-learning living skills and re-connecting with family and community. 

 

Another provides short term housing, supervision and clinical support, 24 hours of every day, for those who feel they are becoming unwell or are recovering from inpatient admission. 

 

These excellent programs are keeping people out of hospital, not by stamping their files ‘not for service’ but by offering early intervention and a real chance of a normal life.  And what’s more, it’s proving cost effective!

 

State governments are focused almost exclusively on acute care, in line with Plan 3 of the National Mental Health Strategy, but it’s failing.  The Shepparton programs, like so much good but patchy work around the country, are unlikely to be properly evaluated or replicated and will close unless there is a re-think of the short-term, competitive, grant-based funding model with which governments persist.

 

We are knowingly withholding service which is attainable.  The International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, Article 12 recognises the right of everyone to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health.

 

Our inquiry is finding increasing demand, almost no prevention and early intervention, little integration of services, ongoing stigma and discrimination, a lack of government accountability, shortages of trained staff, under-use of consumers in decision-making and serious under-funding. 

 

These shortcomings are evident in our prisons and in the community where families and friends are de facto mental health workers and death is common. 

 

Many say deinstitutionalisation was an abject failure because extremely vulnerable people ended up abandoned.  This certainly happened but it was because no services were provided in the community and most highly institutionalised inmates were released without supports or coping skills. 

 

The failures of deinstitutionalisation are not reasons to again commit thousands to a more or less permanent state of isolation where treatment is at best dubious and recovery unlikely.

 

The constant bickering between the state and federal governments over which is responsible for fixing the mess is debilitating and one of the reasons the National Mental Health Strategy lets governments spectacularly off the hook with no targets or timelines.  

 

The health ministers were so touchy about their mental health services that none would appear before the inquiry. But now the time for buck-passing has surely passed.  Mental health has been the poor cousin of health for many years and it urgently needs the efforts of all governments, not to discover who is to blame but work out how we fix the situation. 

 

Some of the issues in more detail:

  • Focus on acute care versus community based services – Vic State Govt, NSW withdrawal of services into mainstream hospital, lack of beds, expense of acute
  • Acute and emergency in stand alone vs mainstream
  • Long term care – is it necessary for a small group of the most seriously ill
  • $$s spent versus disease burden, pace of change, research and evaluation
  • Medicalisation – a disorder for every occasion, the medical pharmaceutical focus, doctor/GP centred, what is normal? – anxiety, ADHD, depression
  • Therapy – psychologists, sociologists, psychoanalysis, occupational therapy/art?, Are people receiving treatment or just stabilisation of medication, is there a role for orthomolecular?
  • Psycho-social supports – employment, health, dental, housing …
  • Emergency responses – role of police, A&E depts, sedation, physical restraint, response to 'behaviour rather than illness

-          divvy vans and security guards vs Thomas Embling where beyond the entry, the facility is staffed entirely with mental health workers

  • The law – incarceration rates, assessment on entry into legal system, forensic services, the affect of imprisonment, new form of institution, Baxter/Rau

 

  • Special needs groups

        children, adolescents, the aged, Indigenous, intellectually disabled

        children of adults with MI

        mothers and post natal depression, mothers who adopt out, care leavers

  • Rights and involvement of consumers – tensions with carers' needs and involvement, attitudes of staff, rights to services
  • Workforce shortages, training

        under and post graduate, geographic distribution, attitudes

        mental health first aid/hairdressers in Horsham

  • Human rights, dignity and respect, seclusion, monitoring, privacy, involuntary treatment, violence
  • Stigma – language, media, culture, recovery, the problem of having 'borderline personality', education
  • The role of the non-govt sector and private health
  • Reform at government level and possible areas for recommendations

-          Should there be mental health ministers/budgets/departments?

-          Perhaps a Mental Health Commission like NZ

-          Role for LG?

-          Collaboration, benchmarks and targets, standards

-          Medicare and psychologists, BOMHI

-          Mental health and public community health centres

-          Transparency of decision-making – next plan???

-          Anti discrimination law reform, privacy

-          Italian experience/Trieste – tax incentives for employment of people with MI

-          Leadership – where will it come from?