NRS83003: Mental Health Service Provision in Australia Report

This report critically examines the policies and financing of mental health service provision within primary care and non-governmental sectors, emphasizing the global burden of mental disorders and the disparities in resource allocation, particularly in developing nations. It explores the transition from hospital-based care to community-based services (deinstitutionalization), highlighting the importance of suitable community facilities. The report analyzes the impact of decentralization and health financing reforms on mental health services, including potential risks such as exclusion and increased out-of-pocket payments. It also considers the influence of macro-social and macro-economic factors on population mental well-being and the role of government policies in shaping these outcomes. The analysis references key studies and reports to support its findings, offering insights into the complexities of mental health service delivery and the need for appropriate funding and integration within overall health systems.

Identify and criticize the mental health service provision policies and financing contexts
in the primary mental health and non-governmental sector
In all societies, mental disorder accounts for an important burden. While effective measures
are available, the majority of those are not accessible to those who need them. Through
policy and legislative modifications, services, adequate funding and training for suitable
employees (Chischolm, 2015) these interventions can be opened up.
In particular, in developing countries, mental health services are commonly underfunded.
Almost 28% of nations have no distinct mental health budgets. Among those nations that
have such budgets, 37% spend less than 1% on mental health. Mental health expenditure for
62% and 16% of the advanced nations account for less than 1% of health budgets. Therefore
the mental disorder burden and resources for the mental health services diverge substantially
("WHO | Mental health financing", 2003).
Not all parts of society are affected by the burden of mental disorders consistently.
Unfavourable groups and the least wealth groups experience the greatest risk of mental
disorders. Several nations all over the globe have seen a transition from hospital to the
community. However, deinstitutionalization is not simply an administrative discharge for
patients, but a complicated process in which the discharge should lead to a network of options
outside psychiatric organisations. Unfortunately, the development of suitable community
facilities was not followed by deinstitutionalization in many developed countries. In the past
thirty years, significant reforms have been undertaken in the overall health and mental health
industries (Bjorbekkmo et al., 2009). The two main changes that have impacted the overall
health systems are decentralization and health funding reforms. These problems are crucial
for mental health because there is an increase in understanding that mental health services
need appropriate financing and that mental health services need to be integrated into overall
health systems. Decentralization of public health services at the levels of local authorities has

quickly been embraced for various reasons by developing nations, including modifications in
inner financial and policy structures in reaction to pressure of economic globalization, the
perception that local demands are more appropriate when planned facilities can better address
those requirements, in some cases, disruption of the scheme due to civil uncertainty and
populations displaced (Zhou, Yu, Yang, Chen & Xiao, 2018).
The desire to enhance health care access, to advance equity in health services delivery and to
encourage the utilization of economic-efficient technology has mainly motivated health
financing reforms in order to achieve the highest possible results for people. However,
government funding reforms have also been seen as a technique of managing health care
costs and distributing the costs to other actors, in particular, service customers. In reforming
the health industry, mental health risk includes the exclusion and division of mental health
services by means of decentralization; increasing out-of-pocket payments which would
damage the interests of individuals with mental illness, because they are unlikely to have the
funds to pay for services; pooling systems like government and private insurance schemes
that may exclude mental disorder therapy and therefore disadvantage individuals with such
illnesses (Tulloch & Priebe, 2010).
Population and society's mental well-being is affected outside the traditional health industry
by many macro-social and macro-economic variables. Many of these variables at the political
level are influenced by governments. The policy direction, activities and programs of
government can have beneficial and negative repercussions on population mental health. The
mental health effects of modifications in socio-economic policy (Zhou, Yu, Yang, Chen & Xiao,
2018) are often ignored or ignored by governments, policy makers and planners.

References
Bjorbekkmo, S., Myklebust, L., Olstad, R., Molvik, S., Nymann, A., & Soergaard, K. (2009).
Decentralization matters - Differently organized mental health services relationship to staff
competence and treatment practice: the VELO study. International Journal Of Mental Health
Systems, 3(1), 9. doi: 10.1186/1752-4458-3-9
Chisholm, D. (2015). Investing in mental health. Eastern Mediterranean Health Journal, 12(7), 531-
534. doi: 10.26719/2015.21.7.531
Tulloch, S., & Priebe, S. (2010). Population‐based indices for the funding of mental health care: a
review and implications. Journal Of Public Mental Health, 9(2), 15-22. doi:
10.5042/jpmh.2010.0325
WHO | Mental health financing. (2003). Retrieved from
https://www.who.int/mental_health/policy/services/essentialpackage1v4/en/
Zhou, W., Yu, Y., Yang, M., Chen, L., & Xiao, S. (2018). Policy development and challenges of global
mental health: a systematic review of published studies of national-level mental health
policies. BMC Psychiatry, 18(1). doi: 10.1186/s12888-018-1711-1