4858 Mental Health Report - National University of Ireland, Galway

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Collaborative Practice and Policy able people, who already lead the existing workload, are expected to shoulder the additional responsibilities of the cross-border project. The project management skills required to implement cross-border projects may not be available from the experience/skills base of the promotional organisations. Strategic barriers identified include the lack of a co-ordinated plan for crossborder work, which should include a sub-regional focus and a multi-sectoral approach. This plan should be underpinned by a relevant policy framework and a single control mechanism for the plan’s development budget. While there are examples of co-operation between the voluntary and statutory sectors, the level of co-operation and understanding of each other’s activities/objectives is still not sufficient to build lasting partnerships which can address issues on a cross-border basis. This evaluation goes beyond the Peace and Reconciliation Programme and makes recommendations for the future of cross-border work on the island. It takes account of the uncertain political situation as well as potential roles for emerging and evolving cross-border structures. The strategic recommendations are: • Influence policy which will be supportive of cross-border work. • The development of a co-ordinated plan for cross-border work. • The development of sub regional plans. • The promotion of greater cross-border networking. • The provision of funding for cross-border co-operation on an all-island basis. • Maintain the role of non-governmental bodies in the facilitation of crossborder work and disbursement of enabling resources. • Build on cross-border work supported by Measures 3.1 and 3.4. • Maintain the East-West dimension of cross-border work. • Raise understanding of the roles/remit of all organisations involved in crossborder work. Lessons from International Findings International collaboration has occurred in both mental health and in other health promotion activities. In 1999 the World Psychiatric Association launched ‘Open the Doors’, which was the first-ever global programme against the stigma and discrimination associated with schizophrenia (Sartorius 1997, cited in WHO 2001). The goals of this programme were to increase awareness and knowledge about the nature of schizophrenia and treatment options; to improve public attitudes to people who have or have had schizophrenia and their families; and to generate action to eliminate stigma, discrimination and prejudice. The World Psychiatric Association has produced a step-by-step guide to developing an antistigma programme, including reports on the experience of countries that have undertaken the programme and information from around the world on other anti-stigma efforts. The results of programmes from different countries are added to the global database so that future efforts benefit from previous experience. 83
Collaborative Practice and Policy Other organisations have been working for the purpose of promoting best practice and co-operation on a cross-border or international basis. Examples of such international collaboration are the European Network on Health Promotion Policy and the International Collaborating Network of Community Mental Health Leading Experiences. Effectiveness and evidence-based practice are two important areas within health promotion and this is also recognised internationally. The International Union of Health Promotion and Education has developed standards for levels of evidence in health promotion effectiveness. The Campbell Collaboration has been formed with a membership drawn from 15 countries. Their mission is to provide high quality, sound evidence for policymakers, practitioners and the public to make well-informed decisions about public policy (Davies and Boruch 2001). Some collaborative health projects have evaluated the collaborative aspects of their work - such as the Liverpool City Health Plan, which is part of the WHO Healthy Cities Project. The effectiveness of joint working while developing this plan was examined by Costongs and Springett (1997). Many benefits and a few difficulties around joint working were highlighted in this project. Boundaries between organisations were ‘softened’ because of the joint working process. There was greater understanding and appreciation of what other people and organisations do, which created a force to carry something through. In addition, because the City Health Plan was developed together, it was open to discussion and therefore was more accountable and more likely to be jointly owned. Time was the constraint most frequently reported by project members. Achieving consensus was a time consuming activity, and the time needed for joint working was often in addition to people’s other responsibilities. In addition, participants had different ideas about the best way to work, and they had their own agendas and interests which made it difficult to compromise and to focus on a clear strategy. The key informants uniformly agreed that, even with its faults, joint working had been effective in developing the City Health Plan, but more attention needed to be paid to the process of people working together. Other work which has looked at the collaborative/partnership aspect was carried out by El Ansari et al (2001) in South Africa. A cluster evaluation of these partnerships demonstrated that, in addition to motivating all stakeholders to forge closer working relationships, it is necessary for partnerships to pay close attention to a variety of structural and operational dimensions, the lack of which can prove to be major constraints to effective partnership functioning. In the United Kingdom Health Action Zones (HAZ) were set up to encourage innovative methods of improving people’s health in some of the most deprived areas of England. Part of that process involved breaking down the traditional barriers preventing different agencies from working together. Partnership working was acknowledged by all HAZs to be essential in achieving HAZ 84
Page 1 and 2:
A Report for the Centre For Cross B
Page 3 and 4:
About the Authors Dr. Margaret Barr
Page 5 and 6:
Acknowledgements We would like to t
Page 7 and 8:
Introductory comments by the Depart
Page 10 and 11:
Background and Rationale 1 There is
Page 12 and 13:
Background and Rationale of mental
Page 14 and 15:
Background and Rationale underlined
Page 16 and 17:
Background and Rationale • Produc
Page 18 and 19:
Project Aims and Objectives 2 This
Page 20 and 21:
Methodology 3 Phase 1: Methodology
Page 22 and 23:
Methodology semi-structured intervi
Page 24 and 25:
Methodology Methods for Review and
Page 26 and 27:
Methodology Lifestyle risk factors
Page 28 and 29:
Methodology • To identify the str
Page 30 and 31:
Findings from the Investigation of
Page 32 and 33:
Findings from the Investigation of
Page 34 and 35: Findings from the Investigation of
Page 62: Findings from the Investigation of
Page 65 and 66: Collaborative Practice and Policy
Page 67 and 68: Collaborative Practice and Policy t
Page 69 and 70: Collaborative Practice and Policy o
Page 71 and 72: Collaborative Practice and Policy R
Page 73 and 74: Collaborative Practice and Policy c
Page 75 and 76: Collaborative Practice and Policy T
Page 79 and 80: Collaborative Practice and Policy B
Page 81 and 82: Collaborative Practice and Policy f
Page 83: Collaborative Practice and Policy A
Page 87 and 88: Collaborative Practice and Policy T
Page 91 and 92: Collaborative Practice and Policy A
Page 93 and 94: Collaborative Practice and Policy W
Page 96 and 97: Findings from the Compatibility and
Page 124 and 125: Conclusions and Recommendations 7 G
Page 126 and 127: Conclusions and Recommendations Dat
Page 128 and 129: Conclusions and Recommendations The
Page 130 and 131: Conclusions and Recommendations pos
Page 132 and 133: Conclusions and Recommendations are
Page 134 and 135:
References Adult Mental Health Serv
Page 136 and 137:
References Department of Health and
Page 138 and 139:
References Health Education Board f
Page 140 and 141:
References Layte, R., Jenkinson, C.
Page 142 and 143:
References Sindall, C. (1997) Inter
Page 144 and 145:
Promoting Positive Mental Health: C
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Promoting Positive Mental Health an
Page 156 and 157:
Promoting Positive Mental Health an
Page 158 and 159:
Organisations which contributed to
Page 160 and 161:
159
Page 162:
The Centre for Cross Border Studies
show all

4858 Mental Health Report - National University of Ireland, Galway

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?