Volume 188 - Issue 4
MJA policy on sponsored supplements
Authors: Patrick D McGorry, Anthony F Jorm, Rosemary Purcell and Ian B Hickie
Med J Aust 2008; 188 (4): 260-261. || doi: 10.5694/j.1326-5377.2008.tb01605.x
Published online: 18 February 2008
Published online: 18 February 2008
In reply: Dr Jureidini’s response to the “Early intervention in youth mental health” supplement is puzzling and idiosyncratic. He asserts some kind of impropriety on our behalf or that of the MJA — an assertion we strongly reject.
All articles were peer reviewed by experts in the field, including the editorial,1 which is obviously and explicitly the authors’ point of view and therefore open to debate, which we welcome. Other articles Jureidini characterises as “advertorial” are genuine descriptions of new models of care.2,3 Far from selling a product, we are advancing legitimate clinical and scientific arguments, and describing active reforms in mental health. Our “interests” are the pursuit of better mental health care and outcomes for young Australians, pure and simple.
No evidence is provided for the assertion that the models described are in competition for resources. headspace has been fully funded with a completely new allocation of federal resources, with no funding redirected from other programs to support it. Furthermore, the youth mental health reform model was selected by the Australian Government through a nationally competitive tender process, in which anyone with a different approach was free to put it forward; indeed, several other submissions were considered and rejected.
Similarly, no resources have been diverted to create the ORYGEN model; it is simply a successful restructure of existing resources that is demonstrably better accepted and more effective. Evidence shows that young people and their families find services structured in this way much more user-friendly, and levels of access, engagement and retention are substantially increased over traditional models.
One of us (P M) is a member of the Faculty of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists (RANZCP), and neither we nor headspace are aware of any official position of the RANZCP that is inconsistent with or unsupportive of the headspace development. Most of the 30 new headspace services across the nation are being established in partnership with local child and adolescent psychiatrists and public mental health services. While many psychiatrists are supportive of and working within the headspace and ORYGEN models, a small subset have expressed a fear that strengthening the focus on adolescents and young adults will somehow disadvantage children. Where is the evidence to support this fear?
We are wholly supportive of further investment and improvement in mental health services for children. Unnecessary division on this issue will hamper all progress and is against the interests of patients and families. We strongly agree that there is clearly unmet need in the 0–12-years age group, as well as a further need for preventive interventions beyond the clinical service system, which may in time reduce the surge of incident cases of adult-type disorders.
We call on Dr Jureidini to put his efforts into increasing resources and developing innovative service models to improve the mental health of both children and young people, rather than engaging in sterile arguments over professional territory and distribution of existing resources that will benefit no-one.
References
- McGorry PD, Purcell R, Hickie IB, Jorm AF. Investing in youth mental health is a best buy [editorial]. Med J Aust 2007; 187 (7 Suppl): S5-S7. 0_BABFJJDC
- McGorry PD. The specialist youth mental health model: strengthening the weakest link in the public mental health system. Med J Aust 2007; 187 (7 Suppl): S53-S56. 0_BABDEGCG
- McGorry PD, Tanti C, Stokes R, et al. headspace: Australia’s National Youth Mental Health Foundation — where young minds come first. Med J Aust 2007; 187 (7 Suppl): S68-S70. 0_BABFEIFG