Lived Experience Forum

[HenryX]

Political Perspectives, Policies, Outcomes and Effects Relating to Mental Health Issues.

{Please keep to topic}

This new thread has been set up following a discussion with a couple of members, who are first noted in the following non-exclusive list, of members with whom I have had some recent contact and who are invited to participate in the discussion, if they so wish.

I am aware that some members may be taking "time away" for various reasons, so this is simply a form of advice to which response is not expected if it is untimely. Others may or may not be interested in the topic or discussion proposed.

In all events, I hope that, while discussing pertinent issues, members will maintain civility and offer respect toward each other and the views expressed by others during any discussion.

@MDT, @Appleblossom , @TAB , @SmilingGecko , @greenpea , @Dimity , @Former-Member , @Clawde , @Anastasia , @Emelia8 , @Eve7 , @Jacques , @Sophia1 , @Mazarita , @chibam , @Lilly6 , @Molly22 , @Rosemary4 , @Faith-and-Hope , @jem80 , @RedHorse , @Snowie , @Lise07 , @Herewegoround , @Owen45 , @Shaz51 , @StuF , @Gwynn , @Adge , @frog , @Everan , @Former-Member , @Zoe7 , @BPDSurvivor , @Jo-anneJoy , @AussieRecharger , @wellwellwellnez , @Bill16 , @Meowmy , @eth , @Alicat , @outlander , @Peri , @Determined , @Smc , @nony , @Tinker67 , @CapnWannabe , @Jo , @Exoplanet , @utopia , @Owlunar , @WIP , @Ant7 , @Eve7 , @Historylover , @Wowzers , @Eden1919 , @Campbarry , @ButterflyBeauty , @Fhr , @Mrsomebody , @Coconuts  @Shelby1 , @perspective , @Judi9877 , @oceangirl , @TheVorticon , @wild_rose , @still_bookish , @InfiniteStress , @EssJay , @Sans911 , @Scout , @Scoo , @Dali , @Wanderer , @Wander , @CalmingNature , @periwinklepixie , @Olga , @ShiningStar , @Bezak482 , @TheJuZShoW , @Tallihoe , @tyme , @Peregrinefalcon , @JoeTheLion , @Rhye , @Sphinxly , @flybluebird , @TideisTurning , @Jynx , @cloudcore , @Paperdaisy , @Daisydreamer 

In opening the discussion I'll offer the following observations and suggestions:

It is suggested that discussion may cover, but not necessarily be restricted to

• the relationship between Mental Health issues and current or past discussion on politics and political development of policies and subsequent provision of services.
• Such discussion might consider what future opportunities may exist in relation to Mental Health issues, viewed from a political perspective.
• Discussion may consist of informed deliberation and carefully considered opinions offered with regard to the impacts; positive, negative or neutral, of policies, and their affects on individuals and other significant and relevant groups of people, providers of services and 'consumers' as individuals and groups.
• Any suggestions arising from discussion.

With Best Wishes

@HenryX 

[StuF]

@HenryX 

I haven't got much to contribute straight up, but I look forward to the discussion 🙂

[AussieRecharger]

Look, from any political perspective, it's either an opportunity to attack or to be attacked. 

Youth crime is a great example, you have a huge amount of people saying that they should just go jail, be hard on them, and if we change the rules to look at trauma, to try to heal the family and stop having young people in prison and attempt to give them a life, the politicians are called weak on crime by their opponents. 

There is rarely any bipartisan support for real change to the root causes of mental health issues in our country.  We don't like to acknowledge the past wrongdoings of other generations, so we repeat the mistakes. We might not have a stolen generation anymore, but I guarantee you, there are a lot more aboriginal kids in state care because of mental health issues due to intergenerational trauma. 

How much money is being put into kids counselling in families of DV, most kids are forced to maintain a relationship with the perpetrator of the violence because the courts advocate that kids should stay connected to parents, even when kids are clearly being hurt. No amount of counselling is going to explain to a child where the court asked them to remain with a parent who beat them. 

We have too many in our society who do not want to understand, who just want to control and demonise others.  Our political leader should be made to work for free or there should be no difference in pay between both sides.  There should be no incentive to be in power, other than to bring about a better society. 

Thats my rant... sorry if it steps over the line. 

[HenryX]

To members who may be interested, without printing all of the member addresses again.

{Any website addresses in this post can be accessed directly from the links offered}

A General Comment

We often hear comments such as:

Why doesn't the Prime Minister or State Premier (normally referred to by name), sort out this {stated} problem?

I just used the search reference

"government policies or initiatives that are affecting the mental health sector"

This search returned the usual array of results, headed by the Australian Government site:

https://www.health.gov.au/health-topics/mental-health-and-suicide-prevention/what-were-doing-about-m...

Reading through the site topics, I came to the following heading and accompanying details:

"Legislation

The Mental Health Act 1996 regulates our mental health work at the national level. This is part of the set of laws we administer on behalf of our ministers.

Each state and territory also has its own mental health legislation:

• New South Wales

• Victoria

• Queensland

• South Australia

• Western Australia

• Tasmania

• Australian Capital Territory

• Northern Territory. "

Wanting to narrow down the search information I decided to look at the legislation in my home state of Western Australia.

Western Australian Legislation

at the website:

https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/law_a147019_currencies.html

Home  >  Mental Health Act 2014  >  All Versions

Mental Health Act 2014

(Where available versions as previously in force)

Consolidated Versions Reprints As passed

The contents list of the current version of the Act as legislated in Western Australia;

"As at 01 Dec 2018, Version 01-g0-02,

Published on www.legislation.wa.gov.au"

covers 30 pages and the whole Act {including the Contents, Act, Notes and Defined Terms} covers 474 pages

The intent of the Act is stated as follows:

"Western Australia
Mental Health Act 2014
An Act —
 to provide for the treatment, care, support and protection of
people who have a mental illness; and
 to provide for the protection of the rights of people who have a
mental illness; and
 to provide for the recognition of the role of carers and families in
providing care and support to people who have a mental illness,
and for related purposes."

We may, at times, be frustrated by the reality as well as our own perceptions of the function of bureaucracy. However, to state the obvious, it is all there for the purpose of ensuring appropriate and adequate provision of service, for our benefit and that of others for whom we care. While at the same time ensuring our safety and that our rights are upheld, maintained and respected.

The various provisions of the relevant Acts and Legislation are implemented and put into practice by people from parliamentary offices through to government, semi-governmental and private organisational structures and to the very people we see on a person to person, one to one basis. Each of those people are required to know their roles, obligations and rights within the structure and at the level within which they work, operate and function.

The complexity of the system within which we and they operate and function, is part of the reason that it may often be advisable to seek the services of a suitably knowledgeable and qualified advocate.

A few thoughts that may stimulate some discussion.

With Best Wishes

@HenryX 

[chibam]

@HenryXWhat a great idea! And thank you for the shout-out! 😀

This can, of course, be a prickly road to go down, and I'm sure there are quite a few people watching this thread with a bit of unease. But, IMHO, this is really important, because we need to have full, free and open discussion about mental health and, ultimately, there is no getting away from the fact that political issues have an immense impact on society's mental health.

So it's not a question of whether or not these sort of questions will be easy; because it's a question of them being necessary.

Personally, I have a couple of enduring concerns regarding the intersection of politics and mental health policy.

The first is incidents of therapists acting as indoctrinators of their own brands of politics upon their patients. My therapist tried this on me; tried to push her own political causes and viewpoints upon me. For the most part, she failed. But it has left me with enduring concerns about how other, more susceptible patients may be exploited by their therapists.

I know all to well how vulnerable you can be when you wander in to therapy. You can be so desperate you will do anything; say anything; cling to anything, in hopes it will get you your happy ending. So how many therapists are out there, telling their patients that, if they pledge themselves to the therapist's own political clan, it will lead to an alleviation of their suffering? How many vulnerable patients are being brainwashed into believing that the root of their suffering is a particular political camp?

I'm one that got away. There are doubtless many who don't.

My other major concern is that I've personally observed a particular political slant in the mental health landscape - particularly in terms of policy. Surprisingly, despite the fact that we currantly have a Liberal government, this bias seems to favor Labor/Greens-esque politics.

For example, in the latest government inquiry into mental health, there is significant mention of issues and concerns that would typically most aggrieve people with Labor-leaning politics (e.g. global warming; LGBT+ cultural problems; ect.), yet I couldn't see any significant mention of concerns that you would think would mostly aggrieve Liberal-leaning people. This comes at a time when, IMHO, both sides of politics are significantly distressed (to the point of being relevant to mental health & suicide-related discussions) about the various issues that concern them.

But where is the policy interest in addressing the social/political issues that cause such heartache to Liberal-leaning citizens?

On the global scale, I've spotted a similar political bias within the mental health system as a whole. We all heard numerous reports of "Trump Derangement" becoming a recognized psychological condition during the Trump administration. So many Democrat-leaning voters were distraught about the trajectory of their country that the distress had notable mental health implications. Okay, fair enough.

Yet now, in the Biden administration there is undeniably a comparable level of distress, depression and grief amongst the Trump-leaning citizenry. I can't count the number of earnest videos of seen from Americans who are visably and authentically distraught about the state of their country today. Regular, genuine people who's hearts are truly breaking because (as far as their concerned) they are losing a country that they loved.

So where's the official recognition from the mental health system that "Biden Derangement" is a recognizable psychological condition? I have never heard those words: "Biden Derangement" mentioned in any official documentation. Why?

Does depression only matter when it comes from a Democrat? Is the suffering of a Republican irrelevant, because they are "something less then" a Democrat?

Shouldn't the mental health system be there to attend to the anguish of everyone, regardless of political affiliations?

And returning back to Australian shores, I've read in articles that address loneliness (loneliness being one of the biggest sources of "mental illness", depression & suicidalness, IMHO), that one of the biggest demographics likely to suffer from loneliness are One Nation voters. Yet the tone of such articles becomes very judgemental at this point; containing a veiled subtext of: "could the defect within these people that makes them turn towards the One Nation party have some correlation to their inability to form meaningful relationships?"

The questions at this point seem to be the age-old psychological chestnut of: "why are these people broken, and how can we fix them?", as opposed to "how is our society failing these people, and how can we help them find communities that they can connect with and feel their values reflected within?"

I don't think this bias is right. That's not to say that we should be ignoring the issues that grieve Labor/Greens-leaning voters. Not at all. I applaud the fact that we are finally acknowledging the political & social issues that grieve people.

What I am saying is that the door must swing both ways. All voices must be heard. We know that there are many social/political issues that cause deep distress and heartache for Liberal-leaning constituants as well, and these issues and viewpoints must not be excluded from our mental health dialog.

We need a mental health system - and a mental health policy framework - that serves everybody as best it possibly can; not just one side of the political isle.

I am sorry if I have offended anybody with my commentary here today. It has not been my intention to support or decry the positions of any given side, in any given issue, with this post. It is only my intention to advocate for a politically neutral, politically all-serving approach toward mental health.

We all deserve to find happiness. We all deserve a homeland. And we all deserve a system that will help us get there.

I'll leave it at that.

[tyme]

Hello Everyone,

Having read your posts @chibam @HenryX, I can see that this is a pretty big topic, which may bring up a lot of very intense feelings for us all.

While we encourage folks to share their views and experiences, we ask that everyone be mindful of help-seekers who are passing through.

If anyone reading along finds these topics to be upsetting or triggering, you are always welcome to get in touch with us via team@saneforums.org or reach out to your preferred Helpline or other mental health support.

tyme

[HenryX]

Hello @AussieRecharger 

Thank you for your response and observations.

I would be interested in your thoughts with regard to Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE's) and their individual and community implications, as discussed by Dr. Colleen Bridger, MPH, PhD.,  a copy of whose videos I have recently added to the "Henry's Landing Strip & Hangar" thread.

Admittedly, the setting for Dr Bridger is San Antonio, Texas, officially the City of San Antonio, the seventh-most populous city in the United States, second largest city in the Southern United States,[9] and the second-most populous city in Texas with 1,434,625 residents in 2020. Roughly the residential population of Adelaide, Australia.

For comparison;

Perth, capital of Western Australia, part of the South West of Western Australia. Population in 2022 is estimated to be 2.21 million, and is the fourth-populous city of Australia.

Sydney 5.4 million	Adelaide 1.38 million
Melbourne 5.2 million	Canberra 430,000
Brisbane 2.6 million	Darwin 150,000
Perth 2.21 million	Alice Springs 32,000

However, I do believe that the same issues present here in Australia and the remedies are very likely transferable. Maybe we should learn from others while we can.

To apply one of my favourite observations with regard to:

"That's my rant... sorry if it steps over the line."

"No offence taken, no apology needed."

With Best Wishes

@HenryX 

[Appleblossom]

Ah hah! Learned a new thing today.  @HenryX 

Adelaide is smaller than Perth.  Why did I not know that?

It can be good to watch and wait @StuF 

@chibam I like your discussion describing some of the main parties and leanings.  Sorry you were co-opted by a therapist to join a particular side.  You seemed neutral and careful to me.

@AussieRecharger Important points about indigenous kids in care, youth issues and crime .... and  some sources of mental health issues. 

I agree jumping onto partisan bandwagons can have consequences and hamper discussion.  @tyme It seems everyone is sensitive and do want the discussion.

Hey @MDT  you started asking about political threads. What do you think?

ACE scores can be a useful relevant and a way of comparing and evaluating ...childhood trauma.

[HenryX]

Hello @tyme , @StuF  @AussieRecharger , @chibam , @Appleblossom 

I agree @tyme, there will need to be a focus in the thread, on process as distinct from party politics involving ideology. That was certainly my intention when setting up this thread with the emphasis on process and affect, with regard to mental health issues.

The reason that I wrote my observations {in an earlier post} around the legislation is, that while there are people with varying view-points, and political parties presenting those view-points in our legislature, from whatever perspective, we still rely on a parliamentary and legislative process to achieve our goals.

This thread must not be about the relative merits of different party ideology and platforms. Those are at best distractions and at worst destructive in this format. It should be about how the legislation is applied in practice in the wider community and our own specific circumstances. I most certainly believe that this is not the place for debate of political ideology or issues on platform.

There is no doubt that various practitioners will promote perspectives, ideas and concepts that will be in contradiction with and in contravention of elements and principles of good practice, and may at times, even be illegal. That is a process and issue for consideration by tribunals that are specifically set up to address such issues. Those proceedings must, by their essence, be considered in confidence, in order to protect all parties, and bring justice where appropriate. This thread and forum must not be used as a de-facto tribunal.

No system is perfect, so this thread affords an opportunity, in an equally imperfect environment, to discuss any generalised or specific imperfections and also to recognise, reinforce and support what is working.

I do ask members, if they wish to keep threads open for discussion, to carefully consider what comments and observations are aired in this space. I am not even talking about censorship by self or others. Simply whether the comment meets the criteria presented in the Guidelines & Info and also recognises the rights of others, with due consideration given to their freedom and right to hold views that we may not necessarily hold ourselves, or in which we may, or may not believe. Comments should also clearly relate to and align with the "Subject" heading.

With Best Wishes

@HenryX 

[MDT]

Hi all
I like the idea of this thread so will be keeping a sharp eye out

I think mental health as a political tool ruins opportunities to promote mental wellbeing and also ruins politics. The two should be kept separate. I remember seeing it used as a political football in uni and student politicians claiming to care about that said issue. In fact I recall one instance where they wanted students with disabilities (not falling under the purview of mental health strictly speaking, but could be related) were called to hold up signs against a particular policy and argue that it would affect them. I think this is sinister and not a good sign looking forward - particularly for my generation and younger who are more polarised than ever due to social media (which is a very sinister art form perfected by the developers - where dopamine dictatates).

I digress

I also think the political debate must be robust. Putting mental health in that foray can actually be damaging to the debate itself. A free and fair society proclaiming the values of democracy, free speech and liberal values must always question everything. This of course includes established knowledge around anything and I think if mental health conversations become footballs (like I mentioned above) then we risk curtailing debate.

Politics is necessarily nasty. I say this not as a prescriptive analysis, but as a descriptive analysis. We are too far down the path of partisanship and the politicisation of all things to try and stop it.