"Yet ASCA receives no ongoing government funding."

I don't see any advantage in government funding another non-government organisation, it just disperses effort and government funds and introduces yet another co-ordination problem.

Delivery of mental services is already in chaos through lack of resources and lack of direction. The first priority of the federal government should be to simplify, not introduce more complexity and set in place proper goals and MEASURABLE performance targets.

There is too much money invested in administrations and bureaucrats already and more professionals are needed in the field, for example in school counselling, where almost all children who are encountering problems fall through the gaps. There is a strong correlation between failing in school and becoming part of the long-term unemployed, with the connection with drugs, crime and other problems that youth unemployment entails.

Health is already under scrutiny by the federal government and we need to see what comes of that. There are too many balls up in the air already.

Dr Kathy writes

'A Victorian study released in February this year revealed that people sexually abused as children are more than 18 times likely to commit suicide than the general population.'

Given that surely the reduction of child abuse should be the highest priority.

A far better question is how long can we deny the causes. We know that children who don't live with their natural mum and dad have a much increased chance of abuse. Blind Freddy can see the link between the increase in child sex abuse and pornography and yet many want to defend their right to indulge in this garbage as adults. We also know that pedophiles are almost never cured so castration of offenders would quickly decrease abuse.

Even one evolutionary Psychologist was able to make one correct observation when he said "Living with a step parent has turned out to be the most powerful predictor of severe child abuse yet" One study revealed that a preschooler living with a stepfather is 40 times more likely to be sexually abused than when living with both biological parents. Young children left with mother's boyfriends are at extremely high risk.

The inevitable result of family breakdown helped along by the porn industry does and will continue to increase rates of abuse and suicide. No amounts of band aids at the other end will stop this.

Hi all,

To be quite frank I am yet to be convinced whether Australian governments are very concerned over potential suicides or the protection of children.
I know they give lip service but are the commitment really there.
As a Community Advocate I come across many instances where one could only assume that bureaucracy have a qualification in the “lack of decision making” and “buck passing”.
One case involved child protection. When an attempt was made to support a family and have an Order or investigation carried out, the question asked by Child Protection was whether the children were in immediate danger. Told not at the moment, it was to pre-empt such a situation as the Children’s Helpline had refused assistance. The request was refused.
The children went on the access visit and returned home physically and emotionally abused. Followed through to have an investigation and a protective order. This was refused as the children were now back safely with the mother. We have a situation where assistance was refused prior to the access visit and also refused on their return. There is the question of any validity given to the request for help from the children. This possibly one reason for child suicide. No one takes them seriously. Children are on property of a marriage and have no say in their future.
Although Australian has ratified the International Convention for the rights of the Children there seems to be considerable resistance of vested interests in have it brought into legislation. Little of the reasons seem related to the rights of the child but relate to other matters.
Australia is ideally suited for buck passing and blame sharing with its three tiers of government, i.e. local government, states and federal. Instead they should accept responsibility and be working cooperatively together for the benefit of the Australian people.
continued:

I know some will argue I am wrong and tell me this cannot happen in Australia, but follow me when I am asked to help.
Had I had not been speaking to a police contact on another matter, nothing would have been done. An investigation was initiated and charges will be made.
Another case was a Homeless teenager, suffering severe depression and suicidal. Rang the crisis line for help. Asked whether he had tried suicide before, he said no and was told they could not help. What do they want? A successful suicide? What good would that do?
Fortunately I have been able to get him help but it is a worry because he is at a critical stage where something minor could well tip the balance and we could still lose him.
Waiting lists for medial, dentistry and hospital is in a serious situation despite government claiming it is improving. Those with mental illness are in an even worse situation.
Help for youth in Victoria is approximately 8-9 months. Let them turn eighteen then as an adult the waiting list increases to around 2-3 years unless there is an emergency.
In the first case the children themselves had rung the Children's Helpline and said they did not want to go on the access visit because they did not want to be hit or yelled at for doing "nothing", just because daddy was angry.
Hence you may understand my cynicism although that will in no way stop me from fighting for justice for the vulnerable in our society, but rather increase the commitment.

professor-au,

I am sure that many politicians are just as concerned as you are and similarly wonder what can be done to get more of the $$ approved from the Budget to translate into well targeted, practical services at the sharp end.

As well, with the day-to-day concerns of fire-fighting (the media needs stories hourly) and the terms of government being far too short, Government just loses sight of priorities. Besides, how many children vote and since when did any political party really take notice of youth?

There needs to be regular review of government to sort the 'must dos' from the 'should dos' and 'could dos' to slough off all but essential expenditure. Then the health and wellbeing of children and youth would get prioity.

Annually there are thousands of children who, through experiencing often only minor problems are eventually lost to education and are destined to become part of the long-term unemployed and possibly becoming drawn to a life of drugs and crime. Where are they shown on the government books? Where is the accounting for them?

runner,
You're quite correct, of course.
Lots of luck convincing anybody else.

I really hope this thread does not get diverted into yet another family law/gender debate but as a mothers boyfriend who sometimes looks after my partners children I do take particular exception to one of runner's comments - "Young children left with mother's boyfriends are at extremely high risk."

Not correct. Statistically young children may be at a higher risk with mum's boyfriend than with their biological father but that does not place them at an extremely high risk. Most people are not abusers either of their own children or of anybody else's children.

I think that we have a responsibility both to try and reduce the risks of new abuse occuring and of supporting those who have already suffered from abuse. Both are important and helping heal former victims of abuse may in some cases break cycles of abuse.

R0bert

Lack of Funding is used by governments not to do anything. Governments never have difficulty funding war efforts, nor donating millions for overseas disasters (not that I object as we do have an obligation to help our neighbours). It seems that the priorities are wrong. Taxes etc., are raised for the benefit of the citizens.
Having more than fifty years experience working with children; initially as a volunteer while in businesses and later fulltime. My wife and I often took many into our home whilst their problems were being sorted out. Many of them became members of a large extended family and remain so to this date.
I joined the Public Service as a Consultant, working with others to develop employment and training programmes and projects for both adults and youth. When the contract was finished I accepted a permanent position and continued working in this area.
Since retirement I have been working as a Volunteer Community Advocate.
What I found frustrating as Field Officer when problems arose involving another department management was reluctant to work with other departments. If there was a problem in my area I would contact head office, only to be told it was not its responsibility.
In the end I did not bother contacting head office but just went out and using my own skills and knowledge resolved the problem without the department. This meant I did not have any support if required.
There needs to be procedures and protocol in any organisation but where the failure is I believe top heavy management and the narrow mindedness influence of “bean counters” are the problem, with programmes failing due to the lack of trained staff and resources. It is imperative that systems financially accountable, but must also understand the objectives of why the department was formed.
Child Protection mentioned failed to meet its objectives. Fortunately I needed to speak with a police contact who advised me of their special unit, otherwise nothing would have been done by the authorities. If Child Protection felt it was unable to help why wasn’t I referred to the police unit

I agree with the author that we need more health dollars poured into dealing with mental health issues that follow on from being abused in childhood.
Surely this would assist in preventing suicide amongst people of this group.

As a young nurse, I remember going to my first Psychiatric unit.
I sat down to read all the patient's notes.
I was stunned to read that almost every one of these people had a history of being victims of child sexual abuse, or other physical and emotional abuse as kids.

The psych nurses on that unit told me this was the norm. All these patients may have had different diagnoses, (such as drug abuse, alcoholism, anorexia, depression, attempted suicide) but they almost all had been sexually or physically abused as children.

My brother-in-law was a psych nurse in Ireland, and confirmed my findings at the unit here in Australia. He stated that child sexual abuse, emotional abuse and physical abuse as children was in the medical history of almost all of the patients in the huge Psychiatric hospital he worked at in Ireland over a period of 30 years.

Imagine the anguish avoided and the money saved if they had never had that abuse as children?
We need to get serious and take this issue out of the closet.

Thank you Dr. Kezelman, for assuring us that there are ASCA and Lifeline and that at least these two bodies watch the suicide statistics closely.

We have also to give thanks for our governments and our courts of law.

In Melbourne, as example, the bridge that attracts most to jump or to drop their children for the final bath, has been securely fenced by the government and our courts of law continually modify their sentencing guidelines since the masterly 1975 Marriage Act, in order to reduce the number of aspirants to suicide.

What would we do without all of you?

It is all working well and, as the minister for housing, Ms. Plibersek told an audience of homeless elderly at the Sacred Heart Mission in Melbourne in April last year, “by 2020 everybody in Australia will have a home”, it is feasible to imagine that if we had a minister for demographics, he/she would say ‘by 2020 Australia will have no more suicides’

suzeonline, "My brother-in-law was a psych nurse in Ireland, and confirmed my findings at the unit here in Australia. He stated that child sexual abuse, emotional abuse and physical abuse as children was in the medical history of almost all of the patients in the huge Psychiatric hospital he worked at in Ireland over a period of 30 years."

Environment is important and neglect and abuse need to be addressed, however there are other contributing factors. This known from twin studies, for example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_mental_disorders

Where we all should have a meeting point is that there are obvious problems in funding, targeting, coordinating and delivering health services, including mental health services and that is why we need State and federal governments and political parties to stop playing silly buggers and put constructive effort into the National Health Reform Plan. These issues should be seen as going beyond politics.

Not much hope though where professionals are more concerned about their own turf than working towards improved co-operation and coordination and more $$ going to achieve practical results at the sharp end.

Suzie I have noted the same and research bears it out that anywhere from 50 to 75 % of people hospitalized with psychiatric problems have experienced at least one trauma; very often sexual abuse or rape.

Cornflower I don't know why you're presenting that link as it refers to a wide range of contributing factors; the twin studies the least of them. If you look further you'll find a couple of actual twin studies. They are compelling reading (like, both twins raised in different homes growing up to have schizophrenia) however, they didn't account for whether each twin experienced some sort of trauma - which could have been anything in addition to the initial separation from each other and their biological parents.

Pynchme, "Cornflower I don't know why you're presenting that link as it refers to a wide range of contributing factors"

But you just said it yourself, there is a wide range of contributing factors, it is not all down to nurture and genetics plays a part.

This was in response to the assertion, "that child sexual abuse, emotional abuse and physical abuse as children was in the medical history of almost all of the patients in the huge Psychiatric hospital he worked at in Ireland over a period of 30 years."

Didn't you read the subject quote that I was challenging? The inference was that "almost all" mental conditions (and that doesn't exclude many), are caused by ill treatment as a child, especially sexual abuse. That is wrong. That may often be present is insufficient to imply causation, otherwise the crowing of the rooster would indeed cause the sun to rise.

There is already a peak initiative to dramatically change how health services are managed and it is prudent to hold everything in place and not prejudice the improvement effort. Of course there will be elbows out from professionals and organisations, public and private to protect or increase their turf and that is where too much of our taxes are lost through poor targeting, co-ordination problems, duplication and complexity.

Meanwhile it would be wrong to think that government is uninterested in child and youth mental health and suicide and that all of the work is being done by NGOs who are under-resourced by government. There is the report by the Senate Community Affairs Standing Committee on Mental Health Services in Australia titled Towards Recovery: Mental Health Services in Australia (September 2008). The report concluded that further investment, leadership and cooperation are required to achieve an adequate community-based, recovery-focused mental health care system in Australia. The federal government's own auditor (ANAO) will follow up on recommendations.

Hi All, Cornflower.
I cannot argue too much against your comments, except to state that all of these committees, etc. come down with recommendations and then it take quite a while before the government makes a decisions to do a "little". Once that decision has been made there is a further wait until it commences, possibly 3-4 years.
One of the areas of my interest is disabled children. I and others have been fighting for year for better support and facilities not only to the victims but also their carers, e.g. parents or others.
Some who are profoundly disabled are put in elderly citizens care units and there are many instances where they lay in their own mess because there is not sufficient staff or that those are not trained to work with disabled. The criteria for disabled are different from elderly and their needs are often different.
Another example is those suffering ADHD. Governments are reluctant to recognise this condition and tend to put these children off. It is recognised by most of the world.
Another relates to children suffering from Autistic Spectrum disorders. Children are assessed using among other criteria an IQ test. Children assessed below 70 IQ level receive all of the assistance possible, mostly by charity organisations but should that child shows an IQ above 70, then they will be placed in mainstream education, even if, despite a high IQ they cannot communicate. The system dooms them to failure, yet Britain and most of Europe treats the condition differently. If they suffer from any of the Autistic Spectrum condition they are provide with whatever resources and support they need, regardless of their IQ.
Australia as far as I am concerned is so far behind the rest of the world that it is almost criminal.

Hi All, Cornflower.
I cannot argue too much against your comments, except to state that all of these committees, etc. come down with recommendations and then it take quite a while before the government makes a decisions to do a "little". Once that decision has been made there is a further wait until it commences.
One of the areas of my interest is disabled children. I and others have been fighting for year for better support and facilities not only to the victims but also their carers, e.g. parents or others.
Some who are profoundly disabled are put in elderly citizens care units and there are many instances where they lay in their own mess because there is not sufficient staff or that those are not trained to work with disabled. The criteria for disabled are different from elderly and their needs are often different.
Another example is those suffering ADHD. Governments are reluctant to recognise this condition and tend to put these children off. It is recognised by most of the world.
Another relates to children suffering from Autistic Spectrum disorders. Children are assessed using among other criteria an IQ test. Should that child shows an IQ above 70, then they will be placed in mainstream education, even if, despite a high IQ they cannot communicate. The system dooms them to failure, yet Britain and most of Europe treats the condition differently. If they suffer from any of the Autistic Spectrum condition they are provide with whatever resources and support they need, regardless of their IQ.
Australia as far as I am concerned is so far behind the rest of the world that it is almost criminal

Cornflower, it is all very well to have your own opinion on this forum, because that is what it is here for.

However, it is another matter entirely to argue against what medical personnel have worked with for many years, when it is painfully obvious that you don't know what you are talking about.

For the record, I never said that I, or my mental health nurse relative, noticed that sexual abuse victims were more prevalent in psychiatric wards or mental health units than any other form of child abuse at all.
All forms of abuse were on record- often with more than one abuse noted for each patient.

I myself have two close relatives and two close friends who are in the psychiatric system right now with severe depression.
All were treated badly as children.

This is not to say that ALL mental health patients were abused as children, because that is not true.
What I am saying is that it is by far the most common reason.

There may also be other problems leading to their condition too, but none as common as child abuse.
How many psych patients have you known?

suzeonline, "How many psych patients have you known?"
That is the sort of numbers gathering and analysis I was criticising.
Child sexual abuse is an abomination and all agree with you on that, but what about looking at a broader canvas in this thread?

professor-au
-What prevents change is the question.
-A dysfunctional system remains that way because those involved derive benefit from it remaining dysfunctional. I gave some examples earlier.
-There is no strong, effective leadership.

Ladies & Gentlemen, sorry to disappoint you, but you have all, with respect missed the point.

Professor-au was getting close to it, by pointing out that successive bureaucracies have been failing, buck passing, not cooperating with each other effectively, etc. It does not matter what the problem is from AGW to Hospitals to Zooming peak hour traffic, not.

Politicians & bureaucracy have been worsening rather than fixing everything. We need electoral reform. Our system may have more transparency, accountability in it than the system in North Korea. But does that mean it is perfect?

Government departments at all 3 levels have shop front offices all over the place, where the public interact with public servants, to pay their rates bill, renew their licence or pension card.

Perhaps all government departments should stop interacting with the general public directly. Perhaps we should all be going to our local members office to access all government services.

Whatever issue we are concerned about electoral reform is the answer.

Runner was also getting close too, improving mental health services is about treating the symptoms of mental illness when the cause of child abuse/neglect is dysfunctional families & deadbeat single mothers. Any change in family law which reduces divorce will save more children from being abused in the first place. Placing children full time with their biological fathers is the least dangerous place for them.

Hi all,

Since possibly the seventies it seems that society has accepted the dictates of government without question. Instead of having representatives in Parliament/s we have allowed career path politician bent on power. Power groups are formed within each party and it is the interests of these groups governments operate and not in the interests always of those who elect them. It has become so entrenched that it is going to be difficult to change. Difficult I say, not impossible. I believe the Two Party system has to go and a system where government is more representative of the people. It is possible for many parties to form a coalition and government. This means that it is more representative of the majority of the people. It helps break up the power play of vested interests.
The Labor or Liberal parties are so similar that one could easily rename the Labor Party the Laberal Party as each is so closely aligned to the other. But both are controlled by powerful power groups who are only interested in their own objective. Look at the time wasted insulting and "one upmenship". The behaviour is appalling and the language! Well. If more time was spent working together as a government we would be better off and we would not have to wait so long before changes and recommendations occur.
Government in my mind includes the opposition as well as the elected party. The opposition's role is to debate, clarify and improve policy development. Our parliaments seem to have been taken over by lawyers, accountant, etc. and do not really represent the people. It is government for the few and not everyone. Many MP’s in electorates are unable to lobby for their constituents because they my not be re-endorsed and elected. Self interest prevails. I did not intend to write this because it sounds political but decided to forward as an example why real support for the public is so long delayed and frustrated.