SturgillBosley994

I happened to be speaking to my local politician before Christmas because a good internet site o-n melancholy, www.DepressioNet.com.au was about to lose money for its critical 24-hour support boards as a result of failure by the Australian government to fund its programs. Therefore I pinged the pollies and Bill, my local politician, wanted to chat. The main one illuminating part of our 45-minute conversation was that it was quite difficult (for politicians) to decide what other health plans must be cut in order to increase funding for mental health due to myriad vested interests. Watching news stories around the globe and home I see similar problems arising. It is somewhat reminiscent of the Yes Minister challenges that Sir Humphrey Appleby would set to his employer, thereby stymieing each and every time to him. Just last week in South Australia an identical furore erupted. There, the government was bold (or hassled) enough to announce improved mental health funding. The resistance was equally mean enough to desire to know what (more highly-valued) general health programs were to be sacrificed for the increase. To check up more, consider having a look at www.rmhsccn.org/upload/home_page/1418150005ccn_annualreport_12_09_14_web.pdf/. Browse the statement here http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200601/s1545360.htm Now to get back to Yes Minister, Jim Hacker in his early days could have said But we should just finance health requirements according to the charge to the person, the group and the carer. And that ought to be the minimum amount needed to revive the sick folks health to be able to function in relationships, at work and in the community. You would like! The unfairness is clear when respected studies state Stigma is systemic in decision-making in the highest political levels. Clicking www.wcax.com/story/16935466/has-a-treatment-center-in-rutland-hit-a-roadblock/ maybe provides cautions you might give to your dad. Ultimate responsibility for mental-health services lies with government leaders at State and Federal levels. It is they who've guaranteed these services have had such a low-priority in capital and policy-making The percentage of Australias health budget allocated to mental health ser-vices is under 840-mile. In equivalent OECD countries, the ratio is 120-year or more. Visit A Glance At Drug Abuse Treatment Centers to explore the purpose of this activity. Challenge to Care, SANE Mental Health Report 2004 at http://www.sane.org/images/assets/Research_reports_and_images/MHR2004text.pdf A study by Access Economics for SANE Australia in 2003 calculated the expense of bipolar in Australia to be $16,000 on average annually for each sufferer. Yet spending is simply $3,007 per person. I-t gets worse. The report states this paltry $3,007 is even less than spending on the average Australians health care, even although the burden of disease the pain, putting up with, disability and death is greater for bipolar disorder than for ovarian cancer, rheumatoid arthritis or HIV/AIDs, and just like schizophrenia and melanoma. And who comprises the shortfall? According to the statement, around half (i.e. $8,000) of this cost is borne by people with the sickness and their carers. Mentally healthier public outnumber the mentally ill with a factor of 4 to 1. They desire their perfect teeth and subsidized gyms at the expense people stepping into hospital whenever we need it! But because they still see the actions of mental infection as perhaps not symptoms but as simple negative behavior, our health needs are considered less deserving than theirs, and funded accordingly. Because of the Yes Minister element, I believe we face an uphill struggle persuading the politicians. They will not transfer until public opinion does, to say nothing of kickbacks and favors. The 4 people in 5 who dont have a mental disease have anything much worseprejudice. They're the people who need persuading that mental-health deserves equitable funding. Australians who wish to get involved in dismantling judgment can get involved in SANE Australias StigmaWatch program at http://sane.org/index.php?option=displaypageItemid=266op=page Visit www.twotreesmedia.com/links for other companies around the globe. It is possible to read a synopsis of the Access Economics report Bipolar Disorder costsan analysis of the responsibility of bipolar disorder and related suicide in Australia, an Access Economics Report for SANE Australia 2003 at http://www.sane.org/images/assets/Research_reports_and_images/bipolar_costs_es.pdf.