NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

There is no health care without mental health care and “access to mental health services is one of the most important and most neglected civil rights issues facing the Nation” (Haffajee et al., 2019). There are two policies addressing mental health in the United States (US), the Mental Health Parity Act (MHPA), enacted in 1996, to eliminate discriminatory insurance practices, and establish the no disparity principle, in health insurance between mental health and general medical benefits. The second was the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act (MHPAEA) of 2008 to cover preventative services, mental health screenings and, eliminate the annual and lifetime benefit caps (Busch, 2012). The comparison policy is the Mental Health Act (1983) of the United Kingdom (UK), the main legislation that covers the mental health assessments, treatments, and the rights of these patients. This was amended to the Mental Health Act of 2007 mandating the health professionals, to detain, assess and treat these patients as needed, in the interests of their health, safety, or public safety (Keown et al., 2018).

The mental disorder still has associated stigma in both countries but has improved some. There are some notable differences in the policies: In the US a visit to a psychologist is perceived as routine, however, in Britain, the same visit is a major step, and an admission of an illness, which is still considered shameful, so these mental visits are publicized (Mills & Phull, 2017). This is mostly rooted in Britain’s reserved culture that, if a person is depressed, he should not make a fuss, but get on with it, or simply sort it out, so, these mental patients cannot share this information at work, fearing it would hamper their careers, and, if claiming that the job itself was contributing to that state, could be construed, as an admission that one is simply not up to the job (Mills & Phull, 2017). The U.S. has lesser mental health professionals, about 105 professionals per 100,000 people, while the UK has twice that number of mental health workers. In the UK, mental health services are available, and free for everyone through the National Health Service (NHS), with both psychiatrists and psychologists being part of the system, however, the consultant-led medical services have an 18-week maximum wait that is mandated by law. To be able to obtain mental health care under the NHS system, patients must be referred to a psychiatric specialist by their General Practitioner (GP), because mental health care is regarded as part of a patient’s overall health care and is approached in the light of their full medical history, with no reported issues or any care denial (Mulvaney-Day et al., 20 19) This applies to all mental patients, except those experiencing mental issues related to drug and, or alcohol abuse, who do not require a referral from a GP to obtain treatment.

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

There is flexibility in the choice of practitioner, and the patients have the right to choose their first mental health

NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations
NURS 8100 Nursing and Health Policy in Other Nations

practitioner, and if unsatisfied, can opt for a second opinion. There are still waiting lists for some treatments, like inpatient treatments, but most services are outpatient, similar to the US (Keown et al., 2018). The U.S mental health policies have been described as being in the dark ages because, they were not covered, and it was legal for the insurance companies to completely deny them, just because they could, and. It was only with the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), in 2008, that the U.S system was slightly comparable to the U.K system. The UK system is considered very superior due to easy and free access through primary care, to the US system,  because its care access depends on the sick person’s ability to pay, leaving the patients at the mercy of the expensive inaccessible insurance coverage plans. US citizens in comparison to the UK citizens are among the most willing individuals, to seek mental health treatments, but they are the least likely to report access or affordability issues, which results in high unmet needs. This reflects a limited health system capacity, inability to meet the required needs, with data reporting that the US has some of the worst mental health-related outcomes, the highest suicide rates in the industrialized world, and the second-highest drug-related death rates in the world (Mulvaney-Day et al., 20 19).

Every U K resident has some form of health coverage, even before dissecting mental health services, which is distinctive, and their definition of health coverage includes mental health services. Nothing in the US mental system is free, and the patients solely depend on their insurance, and access to care depends on the affordability of the premiums, hindering much-needed care access. The NHS England expanded access to talk therapies in primary care settings more than a decade ago, through the Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies program. It now has more than 1.4 million patients in the program, served by specialized, nonclinical mental health practitioners, which has been described as the world’s most ambitious effort to treat depression, with reported favorable favorable outcomes (Keown et al., 2018). The US. leaders could learn from the UK, in terms of prioritizing mental health on the policy agenda, initiating interventions to reduce cost, and related access barriers, and overall improving and promoting the availability of community-based needed care.

The World Health Organization (WHO) is a global, technical, and normative agency that encourages research sets standards, and develops a wide range of advisory for governments and other stakeholders in its active Mental Health Division. The WHO through its division of the Plan of Action on Mental Health (PAHO), engages in the development and implementation of programs for the promotion and prevention of mental health systems and services. It then approves and adopts them through the World Health Assembly, an example is the adoption of the Comprehensive Mental Health Action Plan 2013–2020 by the 66th World Health Assembly, with a goal to promote further development of mental health policies across the world (Jenkins et al., 2011). These were broad strategies for mental health promotion, prevention of mental illness, promotion of rights, early childhood programs, life course skills, healthy working conditions, protection against child abuse, and domestic and community violence among others.  In its 2001 Report, the WHO, functioned as a catalyst, setting out the rationale, with a broad framework for the development of mental health programmers (Jenkins et al., 2011).

References

Busch S. H. (2012). Implications of the Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act. The American journal of psychiatry169(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2011.11101543

Haffajee, R. L., Mello, M. M., Zhang, F., Busch, A. B., Zaslavsky, A. M., & Wharam, J. F. (2019). Association of Federal Mental Health Parity Legislation with Health Care Use and Spending Among High Utilizers of Services. Medical care, 57(4), 245–255. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001076

Jenkins, R., Baingana, F., Ahmad, R., McDaid, D., & Atun, R. (2011). International and national policy challenges in mental health. Mental health in family medicine, 8(2), 101–114.

Keown, P., Murphy, H., McKenna, D., & McKinnon, I. (2018). Changes in the use of the Mental Health Act 1983 in England 1984/85 to 2015/16. The British Journal of Psychiatry, 213(4), 595-599. doi:10.1192/bjp.2018.123

Mills, J., & Phull, J. (2017). The Mental Health Act 1983. InnovAiT. 2017;10(11):638-643. doi:10.1177/1755738017727021

Mulvaney-Day, N., Gibbons, B. J., Alikhan, S., & Karakus, M. (2019). Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act and the Use of Outpatient Behavioral Health Services in the United States, 2005-2016. American journal of public health, 109(S3), S190–S196. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305023

Response

Hello Koi-Lucie. Thanks for the insightful discussion. From your analysis, one of the main questions I would ask is: What are the similarities and differences between the Mental Health Parity Act (MHPA) of the United States policy and the Mental Health Act (1983) of the United Kingdom? The Mental Health Parity Act (MHPA) of the United States, enacted in 1996, requires that health insurance plans that offer mental health benefits must provide coverage for those benefits at parity with coverage for medical and surgical benefits. This means that if a plan offers $1,000 in coverage for medical and surgical benefits, it must also offer $1,000 in coverage for mental health benefits (Mulvaney-Day et al., 2019). The Mental Health Act (1983) of the United Kingdom is similar to the MHPA of the United States in that it requires that health insurance plans that offer mental health benefits must provide coverage for those benefits at parity with coverage for medical and surgical benefits (Peterson & Busch, 2018). However, there are some key differences between the two acts. There are several key differences between the Mental Health Parity Act (MHPA) of the United States and the Mental Health Act (1983) of the United Kingdom. For one, the MHPA only applies to group health plans and insurers, while the Mental Health Act (1983) covers all health care providers in the UK. Additionally, the MHPA only requires parity in coverage for mental health benefits, while the Mental Health Act (1983) requires that all health care providers provide equal access to mental health services (Scarbrough, 2018). Finally, the MHPA does not include any provisions for compulsory treatment, while the Mental Health Act (1983) does allow for involuntary treatment in certain cases.

References

Mulvaney-Day, N., Gibbons, B. J., Alikhan, S., & Karakus, M. (2019). Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act and the Use of Outpatient Behavioral Health Services in the United States, 2005-2016. American journal of public health, 109(S3), S190–S196. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2019.305023

Peterson, E., & Busch, S. (2018). Achieving mental health and substance use disorder treatment parity: a quarter century of policy making and research. Annual Review of Public Health39, 421-435. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040617-013603

Scarbrough, J. A. (2018). The growing importance of mental health parity. American Journal of Law & Medicine44(2-3), 453-474. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098858818789432