Report on NSW Ombudsman’s Consultation of Mental Health Carers with ARAFMI NSW Inc

A consultation with carers to support the NSW Ombudsman’s Inquiry into the access of mental health inpatients to accommodation and support services was held on October 4th 2011 at ARAFMI’s offices in Woolloomooloo.

This consultation is being conducted as part of aninquiry into the roles and responsibilities of the Departments of Ageing, Disability and Home Care (ADHC) and NSW Health to provide services for mental health in-patients who are not being discharged due to a reported lack of community based support and accommodation options.

As part of the inquiry the Ombudsman is gathering the issues and concerns of carers of people living with mental illness who may have experienced difficulty in finding suitable accommodation for their loved ones in the community and particularly if this has resulted in prolonged hospital stays. The Ombudsman’s investigations team held the consultation to have the opportunity to hear from any carers who have had experienced this issue

An event like this can be of real benefit to carers as a consultation such as this one gives carers the opportunity to have their voices heard regarding issues that would no doubt frustrate them on a day to day basis. Their concerns may then possibly be reported back to decision makers on a policy level. The inquiry is looking at a sample of inpatients that have or will be accessing accommodation. This sample was identified by the Public Guardian who focussed on persons that had been waiting awhile for supported accommodation.

The consultation organisd by ARAFMI at its Woolloomooloo office was well attended and many of the issues raised throughout the consultation were recurred throughout the afternoon.

The biggest issue that arose at the consultation (apart from the limited availability of supported accommodation generally) was that carers want and need more information with regards to their loved one’s wellbeing to assist them with offering appropriate support.

There was a general understanding with respect to the obvious privacy and confidentiality clauses, however, the lack of information disclosed to carers and family members is a very frustrating and difficult issue for them and one which can have very negative impacts on consumers when carers are not provided with the information they need to allow them to support their loved one’s recovery.  

Families also agreed on problems with receiving follow through on discharge plans.

The carers also agreed that if the consumer was residing at the family home before being hospitalised, that in most cases the hospitals appear comfortable with sending the consumer back to the parents regardless of either the consumer’s or the carers age and the stage of their life.

There was a consensus from the carers on the limited assistance provided with homecare.

The point was also raised that some of the assistance required by consumers was more around prompting to do things, especially around self-care, rather than people being physically incapable of doing them at all; but this was frequently not recognised in the eligibility requirements for some types of assistance.

Finally all of the carers found the amount of soft drink and junk food available and consumed in mental health facilities to be excessive, especially given the stringent restrictions on tobacco smoking in the same facilities.

The Ombudsman’s report resulting from these and other inquiries is due for completion in March 2012.


Comments

This appears to be a good and valuable piece of research but I worry that it may have missed a large section of the MH community that are desperate for tangible support. Older parents or Grandparents caring for adult children or grandchildren. Many of these carers have, as they see it, NO choice as appropriate, supported, accommodation is not available, particularly in rural and remote locations. Some of these carers don't even have MH services involved or on a limited basis and are expected to carry on their roles, as family carers, despite their increasing years and or health issues. Some have been in this role so long they cannot see any other purpose in life which can lead to actions that may involuntarily sabotage potential supports.
What happens to these individuals when their carers pass on? Many do not have the capacity to look after themselves or survive in society.
Who is responsible for them? In my experience working with carers in rural locations no one appears to want to be responsible. Supported accommodation (MH) is extremely limited and mainstream (other disability) support and accommodation services don't want to know even if there is a dual diagnosis (other disability & MH).
I know of one carer who passed away while advocating for suitable supported accommodation for his dual diagnosis son and I firmly believe this played a part in his demise. Many of these cases do not see an inpatient unit, they are managed, come what may, by these carers in the community, because tangible alternatives are not available.
Keep up the great work, but please don not leave out these forgotten carers.

Thank you ARAFMI for hanging in there with these discussions. So much of your report is our story with our now 40-year old son. After many years of struggling we managed for the first time to get our son into hospital November 2009. He was discharged with court order with only a couple of days notice into the care of his then 88-yearold grandmother. (He refused to speak to us, his parents). He now lives with us again - but is off his medication - we are back to starting base 1 again.
Your report gives us a voice. Thank you.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><h2><h3><p>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.