The impact of austerity on mental health (original) (raw)
Related papers
The Impact of Austerity on Mental Health Service Provision: A UK Perspective
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
This is a discussion paper which examines the impact of austerity policies on the provision of mental health services in the United Kingdom. Austerity is a shorthand for a series of policies introduced by the Conservative and Liberal Democrat Coalition government in the UK from 2010 onwards. In response to the fiscal crisis following the bail out of the banks in 2008, it was argued that significant reductions in public spending were required. The background to these policies is examined before a consideration of their impact on mental health services. These policies had a disproportionate impact on people living in poverty. People with health problems including mental problems are overrepresented in this group. At the same time, welfare and community services are under increasing financial pressures having to respond to increased demand within a context of reduced budgets. There is increasing recognition of the role that social factors and adverse childhood experiences have in the development and trajectory of mental health problems. Mental health social workers, alongside other professionals, seek to explain mental distress by the use of some variant of a biopsychosocial model. The extent of mental health problems as a one of their measures of the impact of inequality. More unequal societies create greater levels of distress. There is a social gradient in the extent of mental health problems-the impact of severe mental illness means that many individuals are unable to work or, if they can return to work, they find it difficult to gain employment because of discrimination. The paper concludes that austerity and associated policies have combined to increase the overall burden of mental distress and marginalisation within the UK.
Mental Health Beyond Austerity: A 'Mental Wealth' approach to post-austerity policy-making
The proposals in this document arose out of preparatory work by the four authors for the TUC ‘Closing the Gap’ conference in Salford as well as contributions by participants at the event. The manifesto in Appendix I represents some very preliminary ideas and suggestions towards a mental w/health manifesto, but does not claim to be a comprehensive statement nor represent the position of any particular organization or campaign. However, if there is a wish amongst wider mental w/health campaigns to do so, the authors are open to further discussions to develop this in democratic, collaborative and inclusive ways into a post-austerity Mental Health/Wealth Manifesto to inform ongoing activism.
Mental health and poverty in the UK - time for change?
BJPsych international, 2015
Poverty and income inequality have increased in the UK since the 1970s. Poverty and mental ill-health are closely associated and disadvantage can have long-term consequences. In addition, the recent recession and austerity measures have had a detrimental effect on people with mental health problems and the mental health of the population. Mental health services can play a role in addressing the problems of poverty and inequality.
Gentlemen, we have no money therefore we must think' - mental health services in hard times
The Psychiatrist, 2011
SummaryIn common with all elements of public services, mental healthcare in England faces a troubling and uncertain future. Two things, however, are certain: demographic trends ensure that demand will rise and harsh economic realities dictate that resources will in real terms shrink. In order to cope with these challenges, commissioners and providers will have to review very critically all aspects of the mental health system, including those that are currently fashionable. There is a need to identify and promote activities that are evidence-based and effective and to jettison practices and services that lack an evidence base.
Individualised Funding, Social Inclusion and the Politics of Mental Health
JOURNAL OF CRITICAL PSYCHOLOGY …, 2007
This paper explores how the changing nature of welfare provision can open up, or close down, opportunities for people with mental health needs to organise their own lives and develop their own communities. In particular it focuses on the rise of individualised funding or direct payments, where individuals can receive money instead of services in order to plan, purchase and direct their own support arrangements.
The Psychological Impact of Austerity: A Briefing Paper
Executive Summary: This report directly links cuts to public services with mental health problems. Well-established psychological research that explains these links already exists. However, this knowledge has been missing from the debate on austerity so far. Psychologists are often in a position to see the effects that social and economic changes have on people. We also occupy a relatively powerful position as professionals and therefore have an ethical responsibility to speak out about these effects. Austerity policies have damaging psychological costs. Mental health problems are being created in the present, and further problems are being stored for the future. We have identified five 'Austerity Ailments'. These are specific ways in which austerity policies impact on mental health:
Palgrave Communications
Associations between mental health and poverty are increasingly well established. Yet in neoliberally oriented contexts in which distress engendered through the everyday hardships of poverty is increasingly pathologised and medicalised, important questions are raised over the assumptions inherent within mental health policy and its implementation. Using the UK as a focus, this paper reviews and maps out key questions that require investigation in order to better understand the complex interrelations between poverty and distress; explores how current paradigms might influence notions of individual responsibility and agency as well as health seeking behaviours; and examines the role of, and cultural and systemic expectations and constraints placed upon GPs as they respond to distress amongst patients from low-income communities. In so doing, we argue for recognition of the moral narratives that underpin both mental health care and processes of welfare reform, and call for an expansion of conventional notions of evidence-based healthcare to incorporate the understandings, experiences and priorities of people from low-income groups. We call for more detailed questioning and analysis of the interactions that lead to mental health diagnosis and treatment and better understanding of the relevance and effectiveness of current treatment options. As a central tenet of this, we argue for more flexible and nuanced healthcare responses that better reflect the dynamic and multi-faceted nature of poverty-related distress.