The Importance of Proper Service Delivery for Mental Health Patients
Discuss about the Obviousness on Fiscal Policy Analysis.
Mental health patients often go through different types of mood disorders that make them vulnerable to depression, sadness, violence, aggression, loneliness confusion and many others. Among these mood disorders, being aggressive is one of the most significant issues shown by the Healthcare consumers (Dunn, 2015). In such conditions, the mental health patients can harm themselves as well as the others who are trying to provide them with the service. Therefore, it becomes extremely important for the Healthcare professionals to be well educated, knowledgeable and skilful to handle the situation of the patients effectively. Such aggressions might make them suicidal; harm themselves as well as the nursing professionals, verbally abusive to the nurses, and many others (Wagennar, 2014). Therefore, there are many situations where the nursing professionals become confused about the interventions that need to be taken in order to handle the situation of the patients effectively. This might be due to lack of education and proper skills to help the patients or confusions of the professionals about initiatives to be taken at the urgency of the moments (Neto, 2016). In such situations, it is seen that the professionals take the resort of restraints and Seclusions which harm the patient’s autonomy and dignity, affect them mentally as well as physically. It also results the professionals to suffer legally (Friedman, 2017). Therefore the policies are required for helping the professionals learn about the effective guidelines which they can follow to ensure proper Service Delivery to the patients and thereby reduce the application of seclusion and restraint to patients. Therefore this policy has been chosen which sheds light on the guidelines to be followed thereby helping the readers to understand the steps they can take to help the mental health patients and reduce their applications of seclusion and restraints
This policy had provided a scope for the Healthcare professionals to understand the different interventions and guidelines they should take under different situations to reduce the level of harms on the patient due to their own aggression and thereby help them to come out of this difficult phase and live a better quality life. However, the first step of the policy is understanding the issues on which the policy should be based (Cobb et al., 2016).
While analysing the policy in details, a number of weakness has been observed in the formulation of the problem for the policy. The policy has been proposed to maintain the safety of the patients and to help the professionals follow proper guidelines to help the patients but they have not been able to establish the importance and the depth of the issues that can take place from the aggression of the patients. They had provided a very small section as risk and sudden death which might result from the physical and mechanical restraints. However, these two sections are not enough to establish the importance of following guidelines to mitigate the issues (Diem et al., 2014). The policy makers have not been able to establish the depth of the importance of the problems that arise when patients become aggressive. Moreover they have not provided any statistical details of the different kinds of incidences that have taken place in the different Health Care units of New South Wales and therefore the only one statistical data provided does not suffice to provide a background for the entire policy development. Another important aspect that has been missed is that the policy has only mentioned about the negative aspects that takes place on the patients when the seclusion and restraints are not provided properly or cause severe harm to the patients (Vedung, 2017). However the entire policy did not at all developed any idea about how the Healthcare professionals are also affected by the tremendous aggressions that take place from the aggressive mental health consumers. Often researchers are of the opinion that the mental health consumers become so aggressive that they might cause physical verbal as well as mental assaults to the Healthcare professionals who serve them. Moreover, there are many legal obligations that the healthcare professionals face while they serve the service users (Berlin & Carlstorm, 2015). This might be due to lack of knowledge or due to an effective decision making skills are due to loss of control over the situation when the aggression is taking place. Such legal obligations can result the Healthcare professionals to get involved in severe issues that affect their professional careers and also harm them mentally. Therefore these issues should have been discussed in the policy so as to develop the main basis on which the principles of caring would have been dependent. Depending upon these issues only, the guidelines should have been developed and this would have provided the reader an understanding about why the policy is important to be followed by the Healthcare professionals (Cusack et al., 2016). Therefore the policy did not successfully participated in formulating the problem although effective guidelines have been provided as interventions for the issues and this makes the entire policy half-hearted.
Weaknesses in the Policy Formulation
One important weakness that had been seen in the policy is that the policy is not clear about its objectives and goals. For better understanding of the readers, the policy makers should take care that the objectives and goals are present in clear distinctive sections so that the readers can understand the interventions which are set for the goals (Stacey et al., 2016). The policy is more focused on developing interventions about how the Healthcare professionals would be able to provide evidence based care to patients in situations of aggression and how well they can decide to take interventions or reduce the scopes of restraints and secretions effectively without harming the autonomy and dignity of the persons and respecting the wishes and demands of the family members and the patients. However the policy does not clarify the objectives and goals upon which the policy is developed (Wildavsky, 2018). Recent researches are of the opinion that better, the goals have smart approach, the better will be helpful for the professionals to be sure about their individual approach and understand their learning needs to meet the care of the patient (Gooding, 2017). However, no such smart goals and objectives have been found in the policy paper and therefore the policy seems to have begun in an abrupted approach. However, if one looks closely into the background section of the policy, one can find out that the policy paper have only stated that the main focus of this paper would be reducing the use of seclusion and restraint for ensuring a major practice change initiative for Australian Mental Health Services. However, this amount of information cannot be considered as a proper objective and goal as this information is quite broad and would not help in making the professionals understand what exactly they are aiming for after reading the entire policy (Althaus, Bridgman & Davis, 2013).
Some amount of information had been discussed about the resources that would be required for successful implementation of this policy. The financial resources have not been discussed in in the policy paper but detailed discussion about the actions of different human resources had been clearly stated and this is one of the strength of the entire policy. The policy makers have clearly established the different duties that each of the experts has to take up on their shoulders so that the policy can be implemented successfully (Di Lorenzo et al., 2014). Detailed description about the actions of chief executives, managers, clinical staff in mental health facilities, non clinical staff in mental health facilities have been clearly discussed. Therefore, this would help the professionals to undertake actions that would ensure successful following of the guidelines and thereby ensuring a therapeutic care for all the patients without the need of seclusion and restraint. The policy had also clearly stated about the target audience who are mainly the multidisciplinary team and non clinical staff who are involved in the management of aggressive behaviour of the patients and therefore the work that they need to undertake to ensure safe service to patients can be considered as an important resource. The policy makers have also talked about a different set of resources that are required for this policy maintenance is the documentation procedure resources (Gooding, 2017). In order to ensure proper incident reports, Healthcare records, registers, forms and many other processes, the Healthcare organisation should have to arrange for all these resources so that proper documentation can take place (Kirmayer & Pedersen, 2014). For all these, resources are also required and therefore the Healthcare organisations would be following the Policy to be prepared with the resources stated above (Paulos et al., 2016). Therefore, from this detailed analysis, it can be easily stated that the policy makers have successfully discussed about the resources that would be required for successful implementation of the policy. They have also provided important and enough information on the human resources as well as the different other resources required for data maintenance and others. However they have not mentioned any important facts about the financial resources required by different organisations to implement the policy programs and others. Therefore, if these financial resources had included in the policy paper, the policy would have achieved excellence (Kirmayer & Pedersen, 2014).
Resources Required for Policy Implementation
The Policy was published in the year 2012 on 26 June and was stated to be reviewed on 26 June in the year 2014. However, apart from this amount of information regarding the time, no other information has been provided in the policy paper. Present researchers are of the opinion that each policy should have objectives and goals that are associated with periods such as in case of smart objectives. Smart objectives consists of a category call time frames were the objectives help the professionals to ensure and thereby plan to achieve a particular task within a set deadline (Kirmayer & Pedersen, 2014). However, this policy paper is more of a guideline-based paper and therefore they have not included any time frame within which the professionals want to achieve the goal and purpose of the paper. The paper does not have any time frames and therefore this is one of the most important issue which will reduce the quality of the policy paper.
One of the most important part of the policy is to properly set out priorities by which the readers can easily understand the main stakeholders as well as the main aspects of the policy in great details. An interesting part of the Policy was that it has successfully identified the high risk consumers and thereby had made them their priorities to address the issues in details and to provide them with special attention and care so that the high risk consumers can lead better quality lives. The point 4.1.2 shows the high risks consumers that can help the readers to understand the main categories of people who are more prone to aggression and poor quality mental health and thereby considered them as the first priority to treat them and provide a therapeutic care rather than engaging them in seclusions and restraint interventions (Isobel &n Edwards, 2017). Not only that the appendix 6 had been found to be more detailed in its approach in making the readers understand the people whom they should set as their main priority and had named them as special groups of consumers. Moreover, the policy makers have been very detailed in their approach regarding the important categories that form the main basis of their discussions. The first group of priority are the intervention priorities that are set by the policy makers while preventing disturbed behaviour. The second set of priority interventions are set by the policy makers while minimising their disturbed behaviour of the health mental health consumers. Not only that, they have also help the readers to understand the legal implications that are also one of the priority that the professional should focus on (Zirkel, 2014). The legal implications are called priorities because by following this legal implications only, the professionals would be able to avoid any legal obligations and therefore would be helping themselves to practice is their profession without getting engaged in any activities that harm their career and affect them mentally. several restrictions on the use of restraint and seclusion have also been provided in the policy paper and certain guidelines and principles have also been provided to help the Healthcare professionals to be able to understand and internalize the principles in their own care to ensure best health of the patients (Lantta et al., 2016). Therefore, in this way several priorities have been set throughout the paper which are not only detailed but also help the professionals to make a clear idea about the care services that they need to provide to the patients to reduce that aggression and at the same time reduce the necessity to provide seclusions and restraints (Joseph, 2016). From this discussion, it can be said that the policy makers have correctly set the priority and have pointed out the important facts that need to be followed and therefore the policy have achieved success in a way that it is helpful for the target audience to provide effective care to the patients.
Conclusion
The policy is a very detailed one which is highly informative and would help the Healthcare professional to practice with skill and efficiency and thereby reduce the use of restraints and secretion. A wonderful implementation checklist and definitions page has been provided that help the professionals to develop knowledge about the different important terms and whether proper implementations are carried on or not. Moreover, principles of restraints and seclusion have also been mentioned helping the professionals to develop knowledge on the principles, they need to follow to ensure safe and quality service. The education and training requirements also would be helping the organisation to undertake proper changes in the organisation ensuring effective education and training for the professionals. Moreover, six core principles for seclusion and restraints reduction have been discussed (Isobel &n Edwards, 2017). Those 6 categories were not only detailed but are enough to ensure that the professionals are maintaining the best practice to reduce aggression of the health care patients and ensured best quality lives. the different interventions which were discussed in the six categories are detailed and would help any of the professionals to develop themselves as expert professionals for the future (Zirkel, 2014). However, there were two important points that need to be included in the policy paper for betterment. The first important aspect is to include proper objectives and goals so that the professionals are aware what they are trying to achieve and thereby set time frames for their own diagnosis of their skills skills and effective self reflection to know whether they have achieved their goals or not (Lantta et al., 2016). Secondly, the recovery oriented principles of Mental Health care should be included in with further details in this paper to align the recovery-oriented approaches with the interventions mentioned in this paper and thereby help in a comprehensive care method for the mental Healthcare professionals.
Conclusion:
The policy paper is based on a very important problem that is faced by Mental Health Care Centers all over the nation. Most of the cases, It is seen that the aggression shown by the mental health patients result in harming themselves as well as the Healthcare professionals providing them with service. Therefore the Healthcare professionals tried to undertake seclusions or restraint interventions to make the patients come under control. However this in turn has negative aspects and therefore it harms the patients mentally and physically and also affects the lives of the professionals legally. Therefore the policy has set priorities about how the healthcare professional should be developing their interventions, skills and knowledge to ensure the reduction of use of seclusion and restraint and enable therapeutic care to make the patients included in the treatment and develop their quality lives. However the policy has failed miserably in formulating the policy issues properly with very few information been provided in the background and the purpose section. Therefore although the policy has given good evidence based practices and intervention, it has not been able to establish the problems and the different harmful effects that it might have on the patients and the nurses. Although they have mentioned about the risk, detailed discussion and statistical data about the prevalence of such occurrences in the nation have also not been provided. In such a condition, it has failed to meet the benchmark said by the WHO for policy development. moreover they have also failed to establish objectives and goals and thereby they have made it difficult for the readers to understand what they actually try to achieve through the interventions. Another important aspect that should have been included is the admixture of the approach of recovery oriented Mental Health Care as well as that way the interventions for reduction of seclusion and restraint and enhancing safe practice. There are 6 important principles of recovery mediated Healthcare and therefore the policy makers should try to incorporate them in the policy for better results. Effective time frame should be introduced in order to ensure that the goals are achieved within the stated deadlines.
References:
Althaus, C. M., Bridgman, P., & Davis, G. (2013). Policy analysis. In The Australian policy handbook (5th ed., pp. 59-89). Crows Nest, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
Berlin, J. M., & Carlström, E. D. (2015). Cultural camouflage—a critical study of how artefacts are camouflaged and mental health policy subverted. The International journal of health planning and management, 30(2), 111-126.
Cobb, P., Jackson, K., & Dunlap, C. (2016). Design research: An analysis and critique. Handbook of international research in mathematics education, 481-503.
Cox, N., & Webb, L. (2015). Poles apart: does the export of mental health expertise from the Global North to the Global South represent a neutral relocation of knowledge and practice?. Sociology of health & illness, 37(5), 683-697.
Cusack, P., McAndrew, S., Cusack, F., & Warne, T. (2016). Restraining good practice: Reviewing evidence of the effects of restraint from the perspective of service users and mental health professionals in the United Kingdom (UK). International journal of law and psychiatry, 46, 20-26.
Di Lorenzo, R., Miani, F., Formicola, V., & Ferri, P. (2014). Clinical and organizational factors related to the reduction of mechanical restraint application in an acute ward: an 8-year retrospective analysis. Clinical practice and epidemiology in mental health: CP & EMH, 10, 94.
Diem, S., Young, M. D., Welton, A. D., Mansfield, K. C., & Lee, P. L. (2014). The intellectual landscape of critical policy analysis. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 27(9), 1068-1090.
Dunn, W. N. (2015). Public policy analysis. Routledge.
Friedman, L. S. (2017). The microeconomics of public policy analysis. Princeton University Press.
Gooding, P. (2017). A New Era for Mental Health Law and Policy: Supported Decision-Making and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Cambridge University Press.
Isobel, S., & Edwards, C. (2017). Using trauma informed care as a nursing model of care in an acute inpatient mental health unit: A practice development process. International journal of mental health nursing, 26(1), 88-94.
Joseph, A. J. (2016). Deportation and the confluence of violence within forensic mental health and immigration systems. Springer.
Kirmayer, L. J., & Pedersen, D. (2014). Toward a new architecture for global mental health.
Lantta, T., Anttila, M., Kontio, R., Adams, C. E., & Välimäki, M. (2016). Violent events, ward climate and ideas for violence prevention among nurses in psychiatric wards: a focus group study. International journal of mental health systems, 10(1), 27.
Neto, M. H. (2016). Beyond Obviousness on Fiscal Policy Analysis: A Critique on Mandatory Spending for Public Healthcare (Doctoral dissertation, Harvard Law School).
Paulus, G. F., Konings, G., Bouvy, N. D., van Heurn, L. E., & Greve, J. W. (2016). Long-term follow-up is essential to assess outcome of gastric banding in morbidly obese adolescents: a retrospective analysis. Obesity facts, 9(5), 344-352.
Stacey, G., Felton, A., Morgan, A., Stickley, T., Willis, M., Diamond, B., … & Dumenya, J. (2016). A critical narrative analysis of shared decision-making in acute inpatient mental health care. Journal of interprofessional care, 30(1), 35-41.
Vedung, E. (2017). Public policy and program evaluation. Routledge.
Wagenaar, H. (2014). Meaning in action: Interpretation and dialogue in policy analysis. Routledge.
Wildavsky, A. (2018). Strategic retreat on objectives: Learning from failure in American public policy. In The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis (pp. 25-49). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Zirkel, P. A. (2014). The law in the special education literature: A brief legal critique. Behavioral Disorders, 39(2), 102-107.
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
