Polpak, thanks for your support. But the ALP has no answer to the problems either. Their proposal for "super clinics" is a facade...it sounds good to the general public, but it falls well short of the mark of making any meaningful impact. The clinics that already are out there can provide a superior service for less than half the cost, they just require some additional funding and show accountability for that funding...that the monies are used specifically for their designed purpose, and not just feeding some coffers.

Gillard announced 2,000 more nurses over the next 10 years. That's 200 nurses per year. I could place 200 nurses in Sydney, and still be 2,000 short. That's a single band-aid for a dog with three severed legs, and then calling him Lucky.

And even then, there has been a lowering of competency levels since the early 1990's, when Neville Wran was Premier, it was noted that there were 20,000 Registered Nurses that had the qualifications, but did not use them, creating a shortage. Rather than asking why, they then lowered the prerequisites to gain entry into the course, thereby lowering the quality of personnel.

Had they asked the 20,000 why they didn't use the qualification, they would have been told that it's just too damned legally dangerous, emotionally and physically taxing, with responsibilities and diversity of duties far outweighing the pay-scales, and risks of litigation, physical and psychological abuse. Lowering the calibre of personnel does not fix this. This is particularly the case in Mental Health, where people are unstable emotionally and physically violent, and every sort of accusation possible can be made...in a day! Let alone for a career, and the physical harm that is at risk to you. It's dangerous physically, emotionally, psychologically and legally, and made more so with a lower calibre of staffing prerequisites, less permanent jobs, and more jobs being made casual to avoid "unfair dismissal" laws, holidays, sick leave, etc.

MindlessCruelty:>> Had they asked the 20,000 why they didn't use the qualification, they would have been told that it's just too damned legally dangerous, emotionally and physically taxing, with responsibilities and diversity of duties far outweighing the pay-scales,<<

A factual post Mindless.

Both sides of politics at both state and federal level have allowed the health system to become administrator heavy. Further to that the job spec of the administrators has evolved to manipulating clinicians in matters medical through the implementation of admin systems and protocols that serve no practical purpose but to justify their positions, but these administrated impositions do affect the decision making process of the clinicians, a role that was previously the domain of the medicos. This usurping of the role of the clinician has also driven competent staff away from the system, as it has in the police and ambulance services.

When we talk about fixing the health system we talk in hundreds of millions and govt freaks out at the thought, yet we have just blown 16 billion on a bunch of portable sheds and taught the kids nothing.

They say you get the govt you deserve, but I know half of us don't deserve the shameful incompetent lying clowns we have, and the other half are too simple to comprehend. Ignorance is bliss and we have become a blissful nation.

diver dan:>> As with schizophrenia, not a disease in itself, it can be argued, but more an aberration of the mind I would think;<<

DD you would not be thinking like that if you were schizophrenic. I thought your post was an aberration, I was wrong you actually employ simplistic logic, no offense.

Sonofgloin,
No offence taken. However, the historic interpretation of a schizophrenic (prior to Freud and company who kicked off the cult of mental illness in the 1930’s) was imbecile. To this day no laboratory test for schizophrenia exists. So sonofgloin, do you still believe my description of the malady of schizophrenia as a “mental aberration” inappropriate?
My argument is as the first poster, estelles, lamented: There are much more deserving causes in the field of health looking for the tax dollar, you would surely have to agree.

DiverDan, “My argument is as the first poster, estelles, lamented: There are much more deserving causes in the field of health looking for the tax dollar, you would surely have to agree."

Estelle mourned the lack of resources within Disabilities, she did not suggest or imply that no resources should be thrown towards mental health, but lamented that both used to be associated with each other. She is perfectly correct. Under that circumstance, Disabilities received a lot more professional services than they currently do.

Regarding your comment about there not being a lab test... Psychology/psychiatry are "soft" sciences, meaning that no instruments can be made to do the testing for the dysfunctions...in schizophrenia, the dysfunctions are apparent in their behaviour and portrayal of attitudes, coupled with their experiences of auditory, visual or olfactory hallucinations, or delusions. It’s all relative to the individual, and unfortunately, relative to the observer too.

Just because a machine cannot be made to determine these events, doesn't mean they don't occur, aren't legitimate or are less than valid. No machine can be made that can track an abstract thought or idea, let alone the emotional content of any such thought. This leaves the industry in the unfortunate position of being far more subjective than most of the other "hard" sciences where instruments may be developed for measurement and detection.

And all this leads me to the point of “profiling the profilers”…we “profile” for terrorists, we “profile” serial killers, corporations “profile” executives for compliance to corporate philosophy as well as ability, but we don’t profile the people that do the profiling. We look at base qualifications, but not suitability in personality. It’s bizarre! Most people that work in my industry, shouldn’t. And the people who should, won’t, because there’s too many that shouldn’t, occupying positions.

Back to genetics, all this has a lot to do with why genetics is the holy grail for many researchers in being able to find a definitive cause for many mental health conditions. But mental health has as much to do with the person's personality and their environment as their genetics. Genetics, most of the time, can be overcome with good management (in mental health), but good diagnosticians and staff are a rarity indeed, these days, due to what I mentioned about lowering the prerequisites, but also and equally importantly, there is no training for mental health staff outside of the few institutions that exist (and there’s been an active winding-down or closure of most of them) except for a few private courses that are costly. Currently in the Nursing curriculum, only one hour in 3 years is dedicated to mental health. Probably about the same for Disabilities. And we wonder why these services are in disarray!?!

When I started in the industry 30 years ago, there were 3 year courses for both Mental Health and for Disabilities, or an 18 month "conversion" course if you already were qualified another field of nursing, and we were treated like the poor cousins to general nurses anyway back then. Now, there's no specialized course for either, and only a mere mention of the topics for nurses at university today. We're not poor cousins anymore; we've been completely exiled with the view to eradication.

I've already mentioned no qualified staff within Disabilities, but now with many psychiatric units attached to General (medical) Hospitals, most of the nurses that staff those areas are only general trained, not psychiatric trained. So again, regardless of the calibre of the personnel, they are not qualified nor experienced to staff the areas, and yet they do.

Bring back hospital-based training, but in conjunction with university. Bring back the training and qualifications to work within specific areas. And the contentious point for most, bring back institutions...I'll answer any questions pertaining to these points.