Mental health policy recommendations based on research findings (1997-2000) from the Center for the Study of Issues in Public Mental Health

2000 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Policy Recommendations ◽  
Research Findings

scholarly journals 18.L. Workshop: Public mental health policies - experiences and challenges

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Care ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Participatory Research ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Health Policies ◽  
National Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Policies

Abstract The workshop has the aim to help developing and strengthening policies for Public Mental Health and support experience sharing platform for Public Mental Health policy development. Mental health policy defines the vision for the future mental health of the national population and internationally. The WHOs developed three recommendations for the development of mental health policy, strategic plans and for organizing services which are to deinstitutionalise mental health care; to integrate mental health into general health care; and to develop community mental health services. For each this aim a situational analysis and needs assessment is recommended as first step. Therefore, this workshop consists of four talks in the development of mental health policies at the regional and national level. First, the process of population consultations and participatory research is described (Felix Sisenop). Participatory research enables exchanging experiences, results and key challenges in Public Mental Health. Participatory research can contribute greatly in empowering people to discuss and deal with mental health issues and therefore is a step towards a more involved and active general public. Second, a policy development at the regional level is described (Elvira Mauz). On behalf of the federal ministry of health the Robert Koch Institute as the German public health institute is currently developing a concept for a national Mental Health Surveillance (MHS). In the talk objectives, framework model and work processes are presented. The MHS should systematically gather, process and analyze primary and secondary data, thus an integrating and monitoring system is working. Third, the Public Mental Health policy in Malta will be described (John Cachia) Over the last 7 years CMH Malta developed a strategic framework for the mental health with the input of patients, families, service providers, NGOs and civil society. The Maltese National Mental Health Strategy 2020-2030 was published in July 2019. This strategy will be described in the Talk. Fourth presenter (Ignas Rubikas) will introduce the national perspective on development of Lithuanian mental health policy addressing major public mental health challenges of suicide prevention, alcohol control policies and mental health promotion in a broader context of national mental health care. Key messages Participatory research in Public Mental Health is an approach to involve the population in policy development. Development of mental health policies can benefit from sharing experiences and lessons learned on a national and regional levels.

The Relationship Between Psychiatric Research and Public Policy

1988 ◽  
Vol 153 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-29 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leon Eisenberg
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Public Policy ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Cost Savings ◽  
Relative Strength ◽  
Psychiatric Research ◽  
Research Findings ◽  
Bureaucratic Agencies ◽  
The Relationship

The rationale upon which public policy for the support of psychiatric research has been fashioned and the extent to which the results of that research are used to shape public mental-health policy are examined. Support for research competes with other claims for resource allocation and the decisions made reflect the relative strength of the interested constituencies. When research findings promise cost savings, they are readily adopted (sometimes unwisely so), but when they require substantial new outlays or changes in bureaucratic agencies, they are all too often ignored.

scholarly journals Corporate management and clinical autonomy: The ethical dilemma in mental health

1997 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Nielsen ◽  
Philip Ward
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Intellectual Capital ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Management Approach ◽  
Corporate Management ◽  
Clinical Autonomy

Funding constraints and management practices are increasing pressure on clinicalautonomy within Australian mental health services. The introduction of total qualitymanagement, output-based funding and changes to public mental health policy havepromoted business-like efficiency and increased control of resources. It is argued thatsuch moves significantly circumscribe the discretionary authority that mental healthprofessionals have previously enjoyed. This paper attempts to highlight the ethical andmoral tension inherent within a corporate management approach, and calls formental health services to acknowledge the value of intellectual capital, creativity andinnovation.

scholarly journals Brazilian public mental health policy: education and research

2003 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcos Pacheco de Toledo Ferraz ◽  
Elisaldo A. Carlini
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Minimum Wage ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Family Income ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Internal Revenue ◽  
Per Capita ◽  
Year 2000

Brazil is a country with 170 000 000 inhabitants (census for the year 2000), of whom 138 000 000 live in urban areas. The illiteracy rate, that is, people over 15 years of age who cannot write or read even a simple message, is 13.4%. About 25.6% of the population live on a family income less than half the minimum wage (1999 figures). Brazil's gross internal revenue is R$564 800 per capita (1998 figures, about US$1680 today).

Policy challenges

2018 ◽  
pp. 131-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Felicia A. Huppert ◽  
Kai Ruggeri
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Diverse Populations ◽  
Widespread Agreement ◽  
Uniform Definition ◽  
Mental Well Being

Taking a whole-population perspective, the chapter argues that improved well-being is the most important outcome of policy. Despite growing awareness of its importance, accepting the primacy of well-being has been a challenge within public mental health because there has been no uniform definition or measure, nor consensus on how to apply such a subjective concept across diverse populations. Confusion created by using terms such as happiness, or the continuing tendency to equate mental well-being with lack of mental illness, have created barriers to gaining widespread agreement on the importance of well-being in policy. In this chapter, historical approaches to defining well-being, issues of measurement, and evidence underpinning well-being interventions are explored. The chapter closes with a proposal on how best to consider well-being as an outcome, making use of the evidence in driving public mental health policy.

Prevention and Mental Health Policy

2020 ◽  
pp. 155-176
Author(s):  
Paul Cairney ◽  
Emily St Denny
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Policy ◽  
Mental Health Policy ◽  
Public Mental Health ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Health Initiatives ◽  
Preventive Mental Health ◽  
Relative Neglect ◽  
Policy Agendas

In health and public health policy in general, the conditions to support prevention policy are not yet apparent. Attention is low or fleeting, ambiguity is high, and debates on the meaning and application of prevention policies are wide. A supportive policymaking environment, producing regular windows of opportunity for specific policy changes, is difficult to identify. Such problems are accentuated when prevention and public health meet mental health. Recently, there have been meaningful calls for greater attention and resources to mental health policy, to pursue ‘parity’ between mental and physical health, and to stress the need for ‘public mental health’ to play a larger part in the public health agenda. However, this agenda remains in its infancy following decades of relative neglect, low public and policymaker attention, and uncertainty about what public mental health means (beyond the vague aim to promote mental well-being and prevent mental illness). At the same time, other policy agendas may undermine these fragile developments, such as when employment policy reforms affect the ability of people with mental ill health to receive social security benefits. In that context, we show that a firm and sincere commitment to public health and mental health is not enough to guarantee the success of preventive mental health initiatives.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document