Dr Dillon touches on a massive problem affecting all aspects of mental disorders, particularly the underfunding of the acutely mentally ill. Not only do we not have physiologically researched definitions for mental illness, we don't have words which define two major areas of mental ill health. And, as the doctor notes, if we think we have problems now, just wait for DSM5!
But global criticism of its model has delayed publication and caused modification of proposed entries.
The Minister's media release regarding the attempt to define early childhood mental problems is acceptable as long as it is left with general practitioners. But there must be a defining of when a GP
can refer to a psychiatrist. In present psychiatric treatment medication is placed above and ahead of psychotherapy and the drug companies win again. Infant and early childhood medication is now causing extreme concern in the USA.
According to World Health Organisation global statistics, we have some 650,000 seriously/severely mentally ill in Australia. We treat only some 260,000,[Mental Health Council of Australia, 2009]. These people suffer the treatable but incurable 'brain disorders' of schizophrenia, bipolar and severe affective disorders. The suicide rate is high. There are also an unknown number who suffer the treatable and curable 'mind disorders' of depression, phobias, personality and identity problems, and the life problems of bereavement, finances, relationships, employment. Most persons respond to therapy, some may need medication for a time, some need prolonged help. There is a low suicide rate.
The terms used are not medical, merely made up to indicate that, for these two groups, separation and definition are a necessity. That will also add more meaning to the 'statistic' so much quoted from psychiatrists "I in 5 Australians has a mental illness". "Brain disorder" does have some meaning, in so far as such diseases may be physically defined post mortem; "mind disorder" may not sound acceptable, but these are the curable 'worrying' mind problems.
Definition may stop the disastrous underfunding of those who are acutely mentally ill; this results in a high rate of preventable suicides.

Dr Dillon is correct in what he says. He presents a logical and true arguement. It is very concerning that so many more children could be medicated as a result of this screening and all without a shred of scientific proof that the child has the "disorder."

Kids absolutley have problems, but parents and teachers should ask for the sceintific proof that the child has the "disorder." That proof will not be given as there are no blood tests, scans or any tests to prove the child has the "disorder. Only a checklist is used to diagnose mental illness. This is not medicine and is purely somone's opinion. We need the GPs to do thorough checks on our kids to see if they are physically ill and see if that is the cause of the problem for the child.

If the child does have problems and the cause is not found, a label and psychiatric drug will not rectify it. Causes of some problems can include such things as bullying, problems at home, physical illness,being behind at school, bad diet, lack of exercise, etc. The cause varies and if a child is having problems, the real cause needs to be found, not a lable and drug given, that can have horrific side-effects. This screening is a bad omen for Australain children

Great article - it's a shame that such an outrageous proposal as screening three year olds for mental illness is what it takes to get these kinds of articles published (articles that dare to stand up and say "I don't agree with this and this needs to be sorely questioned"). The fact that no scientific testing for mental illness exists, and yet it gets held up as a health issue on the same order as diabetes or asthma is most alarming, and parents being told to get their child checked for mental illness need to know what they're in for. Thank you for your article - may it make a big difference by curbing such reckless and experimental ideas.

Dr Dillon is right. How can we be labelling people with "mental illnesses", giving them mind altering drugs -when the 100% workable technology and science is not being used. The stats are in, today's modern pseudo-science of psychiatry is not working. If we continue down this path, we will end up with more created 'disorders', no real answers and misdiagnosed zombies for a society. The only party that will be happy are the drug companies.

Great article. This is an area that really does need some attention. These days there are too many prescription drugs given out to handle so called mental illnesses. However these "mental illnesses" are based on what? There are no physical tests that can be done - it is just based on someone's opinion or viewpoint. How can you look at a three year old child and say he has a mental disorder due to his behaviour. Kids will be kids and they will be happy one minute and sad or angry the next. They can't tell you what's wrong you just have to be there for them. Giving them drugs is only going to make it a lot worse and can lead to so much more - even death. Please lets do something to stop this atrocious push to screen, label and medicate children!!

What a sensible, reasoned and factual article Mr Dillon has provided.
To play loose with dubious diagnoses - none based on any provable findings - on our most vulnerable and expose them to the serious dangers that psychotropic drugs present, especially to the very young, is as abominable as it is absurd. We have already caused far too much damage in needlessly and harmfully drugging a generation under the pretext of treating an unprovable condition called "ADHD" - the parameters of which are so flexible and subjective as to make the diagnosis a scientific sham and a social catastrophe. Let's pause and reason clearly and honestly: just as Mr Dillon has just so helpfully done.