Strategy & delivery of mental health services: in who's interest?
Here is a BBCi report on mental health services in Scotland, more to the point the rnid is calling for better services.
Now I don't dispute for one minute that access to mental health services needs to be improved. However, I've got one question: what's this news report in aid of? They want better mental health services in our interests, or are they trying to bag some more funding / expansion / organisation PR, i.e. their interests?
Somehow I suspect the latter. I've heard from various sources that the rnid was involved with some mental health steering group in Scotland, pretended to do the lets all work together thing, get the information and now it appears to be going off on its own to bag such services for itself. Not the first time its done this. If it was doing the lets all work together thing, how come there's no mention of anyone else? Actually, why not drop the organisation name, and focus on DEAF people themselves?
Now another question: would you go to a deaf organisation for delivery of mental health services? Say you became ill and needed treatment. Would you be happy to go to super sized deaf organisation to get better?
Sometimes deaf organisations need to understand they are the cause of mental health problems, or at least a significant catalyst towards this. Would you go to the rnid for treatment?
Ask the readers: what do you think of this move, is the organisation working in our interests or theirs? Would you go to a deaf organisation for mental health services? Whatever your answer is, what's your reasoning?
Deaf people's and deaf organisations interests, can they ever be the same?
Do you think public services are equipped to figure the issues when it comes to mental health delivery? Do we ever get asked what we want?