Some thoughts on mental health and drugs and alcohol.
- having mental health and addiction lumped together as one service makes no sense and is counter productive. There is some overlap - dual diagnosis - but they are quite different specialties. It’s a bit like having a Diabetes and Asthma Service.
- there is still no well established process for detox from severe meth binges. CMDHB has some dedicated facilities but that’s a rarity. Detoxing from meth often poses major risks to others which health services have not provided resources to deal with safely.
- there’s a huge issue with people who have addiction issues and who for various reasons will not engage with agencies such as CADS and continue to destroy their lives and often the lives of those around them. Parents and friends are increasingly approaching mental health services wanting services to require their loved ones to undergo treatment only to be informed that there is very little option for mental health services to intervene in some ones life if they do not agree to it. The Substance Addiction (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment Act) is very difficult to action and there is only one secure facility available. It is also taken pretty much word for word from the Mental Health Act - which the government wants to replace with a competency based formulation which will make treating people against their will even harder. That change will inevitably flow on to the SAC act . It’s a conversation about risk vs rights that the government is not involving the broader public in - rather they are listening to small, vocal lobby groups.
Can’t disagree with any of that!
Must be losing my touch.
Another well written piece on harm reduction.
One thing I’d like to add re mental health is there needs to be more action rather than words from the government on funding for acute mental health.
For a small number of people marijuana will cause a transient psychotic episode that will resolve over a period of time. For another group of people who have a preexisting psychosis marijuana will either cause a relapse or make symptoms worse.
The numbers a small relative to overall use but for those affected it’s a significant risk that can lead to the need for acute inpatient care and treatment.
However the current government has continued the defunding of acute mental health by stealth that has occurred over the psst 30 years. Bed and staff numbers have not kept pace with population growth and increasing acuity.
It’s expensive and does not play well with the anti-psychiatry lobby but it’s an essential part of making harm reduction work.
I think psychosis rather than mood disorder, which makes sense in terms of its propensity to cause paranoia.
But I don’t think this is the thread for such a discussion, TBH. I’m not even sure this is the site.
Yes, I don’t have any other social media venues to express thoughts, but fair point.
There’s certainly some not particularly good arguments at present for an early end to lockdown but some of the arguments are worth considering, they are appear to be in good faith.
I support the lockdown and would support its extension if that is the best option.
I do though recall that Michael Baker was being dismissed as a mere agitator in the two weeks prior to the lockdown for advocating going sooner to lockdown rather than later.
Perhaps his medical background influenced that view - in comparison to other prominent scientists with a media presence who were arguing a slower paced response.
First hand experience of hospitals and real life infection control might be a factor in some differences of opinion.
I was interested in what he had to say, not in complete agreement, but a viewpoint worth hearing.
I’d be keen to see if there’s a broad difference of opinion among epidemiologists based on if they came through via a maths or medicine background.
Only a few percent of the population think the government has gone too far.
I think it’s possible to consider the demands for more action quicker are reasonable and to understand the government can’t act instantaneously.
Part of the delay process to some decisions has been to allow time to get public opinion onside.
I think the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition are playing their respective parts quite well.
The government has wanted to introduce quite draconian limits on individual freedom. What better support than the party of individual freedoms demanding it be done quicker.
Have had lots of disagreements with RB but he’s always been a voice of clarity. Much needed now. Will definitely support.