Child and adolescent mental health policy: Promise to provision

Abstract

Mental health policy enables the translation of the knowledge base of 'how' to help children and families into the actual 'provision' of help. Amid competing pressures to leave the allocation of services to the market, policy is required to define needs, select priorities, match resources with need, and to measure what has been accomplished. Crafting policy requires balancing contrasting goals and approaches, here spelled out. Public mental health policy can be compared to other forms of continuous quality improvement (CQI).

Ethics in child and adolescent psychiatric care: An international perspective

“…For adolescents, integration into a work career will be a similar issue. There is need for a public mental health policy to define intervention strategies for these special issues in children and adolescents (Harper & Cetin, 2008).…”

Child and Adolescent Mental Health Policy in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: Challenges and Lessons for Policy Development and Implementation

“…Public awareness and political willingness are key factors determining whether CAMH can enter policy agenda. However, even compared with adult mental health, CAMH is neither understood or interested by the public, nor placed as a priority among policy makers in LMICs (18)(19)(20). This is because CAMH is a field with relatively new development of knowledge, and the dissemination of knowledge is slower (5,9,17).…”

“…A consensus among stakeholders through negotiation will lay the foundation for CAMH policy's successful implementation (27). Stakeholders include mental health professionals, parents, social services, religious leaders, and educators (19). Moreover, specifically to CAMH policy, children and adolescents should not be regarded only as passive recipient of protection and intervention by adults; instead, they need to be recognized with respect and given a voice during policy formulation (8,19).…”

Earthquakes and children: The role of psychologists with families and communities.

“…These approaches emerge from models of resilience rather than psychopathology, and build upon natural support systems (Harper & Çetin, 2008; McNally et al, 2003) as well as community models for pyramidal expansion of intervention effects (Jones, 2008; Omigbodon, 2008). That is, persons already identified as providers of care, e.g., parents, teachers, doctors and nurses, and religious leaders, are identified and coached in strategies for responding to the post-disaster needs of children.…”