MENTAL ILLNESS

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Poverty and Mental Illness: A Social Democratic Stance

So often we hear the phrase “vicious circle” to describe a relationship between two things that intensify one another. In the context of poverty and mental illness, there relationship is exactly that.  Poverty can be a significant risk factor for poor mental health and conversely people with mental illness often live in chronic poverty (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2007). This flaring relationship can especially be seen since recently the word is starting to incapsulate not just a lack of basic necessities, but extending to the realm of meaningful employment, affordable housing, health and well being, social networks, and basic human rights (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2007).  This broader scope of the word makes the connection of mental illness to poverty even more visible.

A publicly known mental illness has a trickling down affect that starts with discrimination and obvious held stigmatizations. Generalizations of what a person is like with a mental illness can often times prevent someone from attaining adequate education and employment (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2007). Since an educational foundation is unreachable, a person is trapped in a low income job with no means of escaping it. Seeing this pattern of one thing effecting the next, in this case education effecting income, it is obvious that disclosing a mental illness is a major factor of drifting into poverty.  Other factors that contribute to this visible relationship is a lack of access to community services and support, lack of sufficient health care and mental health services, and affordable housing (Whalen, 2006). The combined effects of all of these factors leads to furthering alienation to a person who already feels this isolation.  
 By looking at the hand in hand relationship between poverty and mental illness, it can be inferred that by minimizing poverty, mental illness will also be reduced. Because social democrats believe in, “equality of condition, or at least the serious effort to reduce major inequalities of wealth, income, social status, and political influence” I believe that this is the best approach in minimizing mental illness (Mullaly, 2007, p.115). Its focus on reducing the ever growing gap between the rich and poor would than in turn indirectly reduce the number of people suffering with a mental illness. 
Their view on the welfare system is another important reason as to why this ideology would benefit those living in poverty and so help those suffering from a mental illness. Social democrats believe in the welfare system. They feel that it is a central social value and because of that fact, those in poverty, are more able to seek out resources when they are in dire need for them (Mullaly, 2007, p.128). Along with this, because the welfare system is a core value to the social democrats, those in poverty are able to seek these resources with far less fear of how others will respond. 
“All humans need other humans to achieve humanity” is another social democratic idea that strengthens my belief (Mullaly, 2007, p. 121). This text, when associated with mental illness, reflects the need for a communal effort in the prevention and treatment of a mental disorder.  The education of the general public is needed to abolish the discrimination towards those with a mental illness and the false conceptions of what “they” are like. Other social democratic policies that have communal efforts in place are those such as employment support or workplace accommodations that aid mentally ill persons to help keep their jobs (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2007).  Supported education programs to help adult learners is another social democratic approach that enables a worker to achieve their educational goals (Canadian Mental Health Association, 2007).  Having the basic necessities, like an adequate income and stable employment, are vital to the recovery of a person with a mental illness (Whalen, 2006). Furthermore, by providing these types of services, it would allow workers to earn higher incomes, ease the pressure of dropping below the poverty line, and in turn decrease the susceptibility of suffering from a mental illness. 
All in all social democratic ideologies is the perfect fit in fighting the incidence of mental illness in Canada. I say this because of its focus on reducing the inequalities of income and wealth, its position on the social welfare system, and its recognition that a collective effort is needed for social well being of all persons. 
-Morgan Jones
References
Whalen, B. (2006). The stigma associated with mental illness. Canadian Mental Health Association. Retrieved from:
Mullaly, B. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3rd ed.). Don Mills, Ontario: Oxford University Press Canada.
Canadian Mental Health Association. (November 2007). Poverty and Mental Illness. Retrieved from: http://www.ontario.cmha.ca/backgrounders.asp

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Neo-conservative land


If you have a mental illness and you try to live in a society that is neo-conservative based I feel you will have a hard time, And it will eventually add up in health care bills to be more then you can ever afford.


With neo-conservatives  believing in privatization of many things, one of those things being health care, having a mental illness and being in the "lower class" will not be so great for you. If you need to go into the doctors on a regular basis it will be expensive and sooner than later you will not longer be able to afford it. So many other factors will take part in having a privatized society not be the best choice for you.


"Neo-conservatism that people should provide for themselves by exercising their individual freedoms and choices in the competitive market place. In other words, people should provide for their own needs by work, savings and acquisition of property" (Mullaly,2007) The neo-conservatives believe that if you have a problem either it be no job, no home etc. is your own fault. So therefore I think that they want you to fend for yourself in more aspects, They don't want to have to put money into programs to help mentally ill people to find and job, go to school, find a house or get therapy. In the text by Mullaly he states the neoconservatives believe any provision more than the basic government services is believed to be unnecessary (Mullaly, 2007)  You need to have your own money to do things in the neo-conservative world.


All in all I think living in a neo-conservative world would be hard on us all especially people with mental illnesses, with very little access to the help, support and respect we would get from a liberal government making it hard to be living in tough situations. The lack of respect and having mentally ill people feel like they were less of a person is not right. They think we don't need equality but I think we do, it's only fair, it's not their fault these people have mental illnesses. 
-Alicia B


References
Mullay, B. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3rd Ed).New York, NY: Oxford University press.

Liberalism good for people with mental illness?


I think yes.

Liberalism is all about collective interest, Fairness and equality and they want to help the people. Seeing as  1 in 5 Canadians will experience a mental illness in some form in their life, and the other 4 know or will know of someone who has one. (health Canada) Chances are there will be many people who need the care that liberalism is in favour for.  Like their free health care for instance, which everyone is entitled to, This will benefit all people suffering from a mental illness that would need to go get therapeutic help, or any type of medical help of that matter.

Say for instance you have a mental illness that limits the amount of jobs you can have, instead of using up all your money trying to survive while looking for a job, then being forced into poverty because of something that's out of your control, you are able to go on welfare to support yourself  while you continue to search for a job. That's something liberalism also is in favour for.

I believe that liberalism should be more for having certain regulations an employer should have for have an amount of mentally ill people working for them. Even though liberalism says it's about fairness and equality, people with mental illness still get left out in any case. I think it has part to do with one problem of having collective interest, people putting their input and giving feedback to the government usually don't mention anything about having programs/rules/funding for people with mental illnesses because it usually doesn't pertain to them. We say we agree with equality for people with mental illnesses be we don't take too much time or effort to do anything about it. So I say yes liberalism is good because it's like a safety net in a sense and everybody get a piece of what they wanted.
-Alicia B

References
Mullay, B. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3rd Ed).New York, NY: Oxford University press.

We need to let the Neo-Conservatives know

 Mental Illness, what exactly is mental Illness, in the article  The Stigma of Mental Illness  defines mental Illness as, " Mentally disorder, mad or crazy (Overton and Medina, 2008,143)." It also states further on that, " different functions affect a person's ability to perform the tasks necessary for daily living (Overton and Medina, 2008, 143)." What are some examples of mental illnesses? Here’s a few:  depression, schizophrenia, drug or alcohol abuse, and it can even happen to people as they get older such as Alzheimer’s. On top of that there is still plenty more disabilities out there that people are suffering from.


 What should be done about these problems? Questions like that are asked everyday by families and friends who are, or know someone diagnosed with a mental illness.  After watching the video “Mental Health: an “Insane” wait for treatment “ I was amazed at some of the information I learnt. In this clip the Canadian public health agency states, “20% of Canadian individuals will experiences a mental illness throughout their life time (Fraser Institute, 2008).” The government needs to realize that not only physical health care is important but mental health is just as important. The Fraser Institute doesn’t agree with the health care system, they believe that policy makers should focuses more on mental health care (Fraser Institution, 2008). They also argue that, it’s bad enough that people aren’t getting the care but the wait time is tremendously long. Mental Health care takes longer now to get treatment than any physical health care treatment (Fraser Institute, 2008).


The Fraser Institution which reflects the neoconservative ideology believes that their solution for receiving better mental health care would be to privatize the health care system. This would then decrease wait times in every area of the hospital, without excluding any specific area (Fraser Institution, 2008).  In order for them to accomplish this they would need “appropriate finical incentives for patients and providers who would assist them in being able to deliver more timely accesses to these services” (Fraser Institution, 2008).  They want the competition, and soon people who desperately need the help will have to take money out of their own pockets to get it. The upsetting thing is many individuals in this situation either no long have a job due to the illness or the stereotypes put on them from our society. I believe this would then restrict many individuals who need the help from actually receiving it; many won’t be able to afford it.


In Mullay, the neo-conservative governments look on ill people states, if you become ill and cannot provide for yourself any longer, you should have made plans before. These problems are your own fault, so there for you’re not worthy of tax payers’ money (Mullay, 2007). This shows that the neoconservative government put’s people with mental illnesses into categories’; they basically consider them nonexistent in our society. They believe that if one’s own self cannot support the social system, then they shall not get support back.

The neoconservative Ideology also believes, “that is every individual has a responsibility to look after him or herself. Only when people do not carry out this responsibility do problems such as unemployment, lack of resources, and inadequate housing, occur (Mullay, 2007, 78)." The question is, how do they think a person with a illness can pay for mental health care if already they are getting discriminated against, and no one wants to employ them because of the stereotypes put on them by are society.

We need to raise awareness and fight for people who are suffering; I don’t agree with privatizing the health care system this would excluded individuals who can’t support themselves. As well it would leave behind many suffering individuals who should receive the right equalities as everyone in our society.
References: 

Fraser Institution.(2008,October 29). Mental Health: An "Insane" Wait for treatment.

Retrieved from:

Mullay, B. (2007). The New Structural Social Work (3rd Ed).New York, NY: Oxford University press.

Overton, S. L. and Medina S.L., The Stigma of Mental Illness. Journal of Counseling and Development v. 86 no. 2 (2008) p. 143-51

Retrieved from:
http://vnweb.hwwilsonweb.com.proxy1.lib.umanitoba.ca/hww/results/external_link_maincontentframe.jhtml?_DARGS=/hww/results/results_common.jhtml.44

Tognazzini, Paula; Davis, Christine; Kean, Anna-Marie; Osborne, Margaret; Wong, Katherine. (2008). Reducing the stigma of mental Illness.

Retrieved from: