Policy Analysis: South Australia's Mental Health and Wellbeing Policy

This policy analysis critically evaluates South Australia's Mental Health and Wellbeing Policy based on the WPR approach. It examines the problem representation, underlying assumptions, origins, and effects of the policy.

Running head: POLICY ANALYSIS
WPR approach
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1POLICY ANALYSIS
Introduction- Mental health is an umbrella term that refers to presence of psychological
wellbeing and absence of any major mental disorders. It refers to the state of a person who is
able to function at a satisfactory level of behavioural and emotional adjustment (Rogers &
Pilgrim, 2014). Taking into consideration the perspectives of holism and positive psychology,
mental health also refers to the capability of an individual to enjoy his life, while striking a
balance between efforts taken, and life activities for attaining psychological resilience. The
World Health Organisation defines mental health as perceived self-efficacy, subjective
wellbeing, competence, autonomy, self-actualization of emotional and intellectual potential, and
intergenerational dependence (WHO, 2018). Good mental health encompasses the capacity of a
person to maintain and develop good relationship and association with others, while effectively
managing and coping with uncertainty and changes (Allen et al., 2014). The WPR approach will
be used for analysing the policy (Bacchi & Goodwin, 2016). This approach primarily helps I
critical examination of major public policies and is based in the basic premise that what is
proposed for changing a particular problem helps in revealing the matter of concern. This
assignment will critically evaluate South Australia’s Mental Health and Wellbeing Policy based
on the six questions encompassed in the WPR approach (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015).
What is the problem represented to be in a specific policy- South Australia’s Mental
Health and Wellbeing Policy places emphasis on the fact that good mental health has been found
to make a vital contribution to the wellbeing and general health of all individuals in the
community, and also exerts a significant influence on the economic and social outcome for all
South Australians, regardless of their cultural background and age (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015).
The policy provides a definite framework, with the aim of promoting wellbeing and good mental
health in the public, and reforming the mental healthcare system. It also elaborates on the need of

2POLICY ANALYSIS
improving psychological wellbeing of all South Australians by recognising the importance of
community approach to mental health. The policy states that presence of challenges for people
suffering from mental illness, their caregivers and families is the major problem that needs to be
solved. Hence, it can be suggested that, absence of good mental health in the South Australian
community has been addressed by the policy.
Maintenance of a good mental health is imperative to living a healthy and long life,
owing to the fact that good mental health plays an effective role in enhancing the life of an
individual, while poor mental health most often prevents those persons from attaining and
enriched life (Gilmour, 2014). There is mounting evidence for the fact that several emotional
capabilities are associated with physical health and stress management, both of which are
prosocial behaviour (Gascon et al., 2015). In addition it has also been found that people who lack
sound mental health demonstrate an inclination to adoption of antisocial behaviour, like
vandalism, drug and alcohol abuse in the community, which in turn is a direct manifestation of
their suppressed emotions and mental health (Patterson, DeBaryshe & Ramsey, 2017).
Therefore, it can be suggested that the policy is correct in recognising the importance of
enhancing mental health of South Australian, in order to uplift the overall health of the
community.
What deep-seated presuppositions or assumptions underlie this representation of the
“problem”- The arguments presented in the policy rely upon the fact that mental disorders
affects women and children, regardless of their age and cultural background, and create
significant impacts on the overall wellbeing (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015). An estimated 13%
South Australians reported very high or high degrees of psychological distress, in comparison to
Australians, and such psychological distress was present more among people aged 25-34 years

3POLICY ANALYSIS
(16%), in contrast to those aged above 65 years (9%) (ABS, 2011). It has also been found that
South Australia has a record of highest per capita expenditure on mental health associated
medications, in relation to the Repatriation Pharmaceutical Benefit Scheme, and Pharmaceutical
Benefit Scheme, when compared to other Australian states. Hence, the policy is accurate in
identifying the widespread prevalence of mental disorders in the state, which called for the need
of implementing a position statement, to uplift the mental health of its citizens. Presence of a
mental illness also encompasses conditions that influence an individual’s feeling, thinking,
mood, and also affects the ability of the person to function or relate to others. In addition, mental
health disorders affect the community as a whole, and are not just restricted to an isolated a small
segment (Galderisi et al., 2015).
Consequently, they act in the form of a major challenge to the process of global
development, and the risks of poor mental health is higher among the homeless, the poor, the
unemployed, individuals with low educational attainment, migrants and refugees, victims of
violence, adolescence, children, indigenous population, neglected elderly, and abused women
(Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015). The governmental mentalities that might have underpinned the
policy formulation comprise of the Mental Health Act of South Australia, enforced in 2009,
which advocated for both compulsory and voluntary treatment of mental health disorders
(Legislation.sa.gov.au, 2018). This act was enforced with the aim of making appropriate
provisions for care, treatment, and rehabilitation of individuals suffering from severe mental
illnesses, with the purpose of facilitating their recovery to the maximum extent possible, and
configuring powers for making community treatment orders. The fact that the act also placed a
focus on providing protection to the legal rights and freedom of people suffering from mental
illness, might have also paved the way for the policy.

4POLICY ANALYSIS
How has this representation of the “problem” come about- The policy has accurately
represented the problem of poor mental health by elaborating on the need of providing rights to
all South Australians, who effectively engage with mental health care system, besides helping
them achieve complete citizenship, and promote their recovery (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015). In
considering the representation of the problem of people who are at risk of suffering from for
mental health, and promoting their recovery, there is a need to think about the historical origin of
the policy agenda. Australia has a recent proud history of formulating and enforcing mental
health acts that include collaborative work between different territories, states, and the Federal
government. It had been agreed upon by the Australian health ministers in the 1992, to enforce
the National Mental Health Plan for promoting sound mental health of the entire community as
and where possible, in order to prevent development of mental disorders and problems
(Department of Health, 2018). They collaborated to lower impact of mental disorders on
families, individuals, and communities, while assuring rights of individuals suffering from such
disorders. In addition to this strategy, other mental health plans have also been framed by the
government such as, the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) National Action Plan on
Mental Health (2006), and allied strategies that were typically focused on promoting access to
treatment for mental disorders by utilising Medicare benefit schemes (Grace et al., 2015). Hence,
presence of poor mental health in the community is the accountability and responsibility of the
South Australian government.
The representation of the problem has also been governed by the fact that most of the
strategies and plans have devoted attention to evaluation and monitoring of measures that will
help in reporting the achievements. Additional findings from the National Survey of Mental
Health and Wellbeing, conducted in 2007 also provide adequate evidence on the influence of

5POLICY ANALYSIS
increasing access to mental health services in primary care settings, besides reporting the
manifold increase in percentage of people suffering from mental disorders (ABS, 2008).
Therefore, this policy represents a well-formulated and comprehensive response, owing to the
fact that it is premised on the aforementioned strategies and reports that had been conducted by
the government. Thus, it is the responsibility of the government to solve the problem of poor
mental health.
What is left unproblematic in this problem representation? Where are the silences? Can the
“problem” be conceptualized differently- The policy has placed sufficient importance on
different aspects such as, respect of individual rights, recovery from mental disorders, culturally
appropriate and consumers-centred delivery of care, social inclusion and participation for
promoting positive mental health, early intervention and prevention, shared decision making,
evidence-based treatment, accessible care services, and judicious use of resources
(Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015). However, one major aspect that has not been discussed in
satisfactory details is the economic burden of mental illnesses. Taking into consideration the
widespread prevalence of substance dependence and mental health problems in children and
adults, significant financial burden is also created on the affected person, family members, and
the community as a whole (Lea, de Wit & Reynolds, 2014). Economic impacts of mental
disorders commonly include the influence that it exerts on personal income, capability of
individuals with mental complaint, and their caregivers to effectively work and be responsible
for productive contribution, to economy of the nation (Vigo, Thornicroft & Atun, 2016).
Financial influence also encompasses support services and proper utilisation of treatment. It has
also been found that sufferers of mental disorders lose their earnings and work, and their

6POLICY ANALYSIS
disability prevents them from getting a employment opportunities that results in anguish and
suffering as well.
Informal caregiving by family and friends makes them take time off from their work,
thereby reducing their productivity and finances, besides adding two social isolation and anguish.
Employers often contribute to the care and treatment of people suffering from mental health
disorders that directly reduces productivity (Shearer, McCrone & Romeo, 2016). Reports from
the Australian government suggest that an estimated $9.1 billion that accounts for approximately
$375/individual that had been spent on services related to mental health during 2016-17, which
was way more than $359/individual in 2012-13. Furthermore, there has been 1.1% yearly
increase in per capita expenditure on mental health associated services. Additional economic
expenditure related to mental disorders can be associated with the fact that $5.7 billion had been
spent on territory and state mental health services in the same year, with $536 million on
specialised mental healthcare facilities in private hospitals (AIHW, 2018). In addition, the
prevalence of people suffering from mental illness who accessed psychiatric disability services
was found to be highest in South Australia with 537.5 people per 100,000 populations. Hence,
sufficient emphasis should have been provided by this policy on the financial burden created by
mental health disorders and the ways by which the formulated strategies could reduce it.
What effects (discursive, subjectification, lived) are produced by this representation of
the “problem”- The method implication of the policy can be associated with the fact that suitable
realization of the objectives and policy directives will facilitate recovery of people from mental
illnesses that will not only help them again a better control over their lives, but will also provide
assistance in accomplishing a satisfying and purposeful life (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015).
According to the policy, wellbeing and good mental health is largely dependent on a plethora of

7POLICY ANALYSIS
factors, and a holistic community approach is imperative for lowering or preventing the impacts
of search disorders. It has been often reported by several people that recovery from mental
disorders involves several challenges and setback (Henwood et al., 2015). Hence, through an
effective implementation of the policy, access to mental health facilities will get increased that
will directly prove beneficial in early intervention and management of the disorders, thereby
preventing for the deterioration of health and quality of life. Furthermore, efforts taken by the
policy to eliminate all forms of stigma and discrimination and provide culturally appropriate care
services to all South Australians will also enhance the recovery process.
How and where has this representation of the “problem” been produced, disseminated
and defended? How has it been and/or how can it be disrupted and replaced- The policy has
effectively addressed the problem of poor mental health and even if the problem of mental
disorders were addressed differently, there would not have been much changes in the response.
The policy has been framed by taking into consideration the effects of poor mental health on the
entire community, following which it has established the framework that aims at promoting and
progressive mental healthcare reforms (Sahealth.sa.gov.au, 2015).
Hence, it can be suggested that the policy selected for analysis in the assignment
accurately identifies the problem of poor mental health and wellbeing in the community, which
calls for the need of implementing health promotion programs, which address the identified gap
in the policy. Thus, a qualitative research project can be conducted based on the research
question “Does the mental health recovery project reduce the economic burden of mental
disorders on the individual, family, and community’?

8POLICY ANALYSIS
Conclusion- Thus, it can be concluded that mental health acts as a base for optimal
quality of life and individual wellbeing, and is also imperative for effective functioning of a
complete society. Presence of mental disorders creates substantial impact on productivity at
work, educational attainment, crime rates, development of personal relationships, and substance
abuse. The global burden of such mental illnesses are extending beyond the capacities of
treatment, and the monetary and social costs that are associated with this burden call for the need
of promoting mental health, by effectively managing and preventing the disorders.
Discrimination and stigma are also associated with mental illness in different aspects like,
education and employment that result in reduced access to the clinical services. Furthermore,
failure to deliver care services that are in alignment will the cultural values and preferences of
patient also worsen their health outcomes. Therefore, an analysis of the policy suggests that it
has been accurately framed with the prime objective of promoting mental health recovery, and
reducing the prevalence of mental disorders in the state of South Australia.

9POLICY ANALYSIS
References
Allen, J., Balfour, R., Bell, R., & Marmot, M. (2014). Social determinants of mental
health. International review of psychiatry, 26(4), 392-407.
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2008). 4326.0 - National Survey of Mental Health and
Wellbeing: Summary of Results, 2007. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4326.0Main+Features32007?
OpenDocument
Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2011). FEATURE ARTICLE 2: EMOTIONAL WELL-BEING IN
SOUTH AUSTRALIA. Retrieved from
https://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/1345.4Feature%20Article2Mar
%202011
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2018).Mental health services In brief 2018.
Retrieved from https://www.aihw.gov.au/getmedia/0e102c2f-694b-4949-84fb-
e5db1c941a58/aihw-hse-211.pdf.aspx?inline=true
Bacchi, C., & Goodwin, S. (2016) Poststructural Policy Analysis: A Guide to Practice. NY:
Palgrave Macmillan. Retrieved from https://www.palgrave.com/in/book/9781137525444
Department of Health. (2018). First National Mental Health Plan. Retrieved from
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/publications/publishing.nsf/Content/mental-pubs-i-
midrev2-toc~mental-pubs-i-midrev2-2~mental-pubs-i-midrev2-2-fir
Galderisi, S., Heinz, A., Kastrup, M., Beezhold, J., & Sartorius, N. (2015). Toward a new
definition of mental health. World Psychiatry, 14(2), 231-233.

10POLICY ANALYSIS
Gascon, M., Triguero-Mas, M., Martínez, D., Dadvand, P., Forns, J., Plasència, A., &
Nieuwenhuijsen, M. (2015). Mental health benefits of long-term exposure to residential
green and blue spaces: a systematic review. International journal of environmental
research and public health, 12(4), 4354-4379.
Gilmour, H. (2014). Positive mental health and mental illness. Statistics Canada.
Grace, F. C., Meurk, C. S., Head, B. W., Hall, W. D., Carstensen, G., Harris, M. G., &
Whiteford, H. A. (2015). An analysis of policy levers used to implement mental health
reform in Australia 1992-2012. BMC health services research, 15(1), 479.
Henwood, B. F., Derejko, K. S., Couture, J., & Padgett, D. K. (2015). Maslow and mental health
recovery: A comparative study of homeless programs for adults with serious mental
illness. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services
Research, 42(2), 220-228.
Lea, T., de Wit, J., & Reynolds, R. (2014). Minority stress in lesbian, gay, and bisexual young
adults in Australia: associations with psychological distress, suicidality, and substance
use. Archives of sexual behavior, 43(8), 1571-1578.
Legislation.sa.gov.au. (2018). South Australia Mental Health Act 2009. Retrieved from
https://www.legislation.sa.gov.au/LZ/C/A/MENTAL%20HEALTH%20ACT%202009/
CURRENT/2009.28.AUTH.PDF
Patterson, G. R., DeBaryshe, B. D., & Ramsey, E. (2017). A developmental perspective on
antisocial behavior. In Developmental and Life-course Criminological Theories(pp. 29-
35). Routledge.

11POLICY ANALYSIS
Rogers, A., & Pilgrim, D. (2014). A sociology of mental health and illness. McGraw-Hill
Education (UK).
Sahealth.sa.gov.au. (2015). South Australia’s Mental Health and Wellbeing Policy (2010-2015).
Retrieved from
https://www.sahealth.sa.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/3ae2ab80430c70968be5db2cf7cfa853/
sahealthmentalhealthandwellbeingpolicy-conspart-sahealth-30062010.pdf?
MOD=AJPERES&CACHEID=ROOTWORKSPACE-
3ae2ab80430c70968be5db2cf7cfa853-lYytnqm
Shearer, J., McCrone, P., & Romeo, R. (2016). Economic evaluation of mental health
interventions: a guide to costing approaches. Pharmacoeconomics, 34(7), 651-664.
Vigo, D., Thornicroft, G., & Atun, R. (2016). Estimating the true global burden of mental
illness. The Lancet Psychiatry, 3(2), 171-178.
World Health Organization. (2018). Mental health: strengthening our response. Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/mental-health-strengthening-our-
response