A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION FROM NEW FOUR-TIERED MODEL
The new four-tiered model, which tailors mental health services to a person’s severity of needs, perhaps make some progress in enhancing accessibility, but it does not come without its own set of difficulties that call for careful thought.
The model provides a wide range of treatment options, from community-led mental wellness promotion and peer support at the lowest level to specialized medical interventions. & nbsp,
The potential for clients to be moved up to higher levels of care, especially if community and primary care providers lack the knowledge, skills, or self-assurance required to manage mental health issues, is a pressing problem. This could lead to an original overloading of specialized services, which would cause longer wait times and possibly lower care standards.
The National Mental Health Competency Training Framework, which aims to assist mental health professionals in acquiring the necessary knowledge, skills, and capabilities appropriate to each level of care, has been added to the model to address this.
This is a positive step in the right direction, but it’s important to strike an appropriate balance between academic credentials and practical knowledge. A competency framework that places an excessive emphasis on academic credentials runs the risk of ignoring the complex abilities and compassionate knowing that come from practical knowledge.
Although it was not specifically mentioned in the National Strategy, all levels of mental health care workers must be supported by care. The complexity of mental health care frequently necessitates a level of expertise that can only be attained through coaching and real-world experience.
By establishing a strong regulatory structure, practitioners could be better able to manage difficult cases, improving the standard of care. This would not only add a second level of support, but it would also boost the confidence and expert development of mental health care professionals.
Another worry is that the design might unintentionally establish a” two-tier” program where those who can afford higher costs for more urgent, specialized care skip the lower tiers, worsening access and outcome disparities. This could result in a situation where complex cases are probably overburdened by public services while simpler cases that could be efficiently managed at lower tiers are diverted to private mental health services for quicker treatment.
Therefore, one question is whether a more powerful insurance system and employer-sponsored benefits may make secret mental health services an affordable choice.