Prevalence of Serious Mental Illness (SMI) in Washington State

I found this really cool report made by the Mental Health Division (MHD) in 2000 for the adherence to a legislation mandated by, I would assume, the government (Chapter 7, Laws of 2001, E2, Section 204(5)(c) and Chapter 25, Laws of 2003, E1 Section 204(5)(b)). This law instated in 1998 says that a study “shall examine how reasonable estimates of the prevalence of mental illness relate to the incidence of persons enrolled in medical assistance programs in each regional support network area.”

What’s really cool about this 2000 study is the fact that is estimates the prevalence of serious mental illnesses (SMI’s) in Washington state by region.

This file, wa-stats-comparisons.doc, contains the comparisons made by regions within Washington State from the 2000 full US census. It’s interesting to see that areas such as King county and Northern Puget sound have an extreamly high percentage of adults who suffer from a serious mental illness, 29.5% and 16.3% respectively. According to this study Grays Harbor and northeastern Washington have the lowest occurance of SIM’s at 1.1% and 1.2% respectively.

MHD found that 295,884 adult Washingtonians suffer form a SMI and that 133,406 of these people need public mental health services. This means that as of 2000, 5.02% of Washington adults have a SMI but only about 45.09% of those with a SMI need public mental health services.

A Forfeit of Ethics for Power and Profit.

Not all medical diagnoses are made in your best interest.  I would like to call special attention to Fact #3: No pharmaceuticals actually cure or resolve the underlying causes of diseases. Even successful drugs “manage symptoms”.This fact goes along very well with the previous video of interviews with Psychiatrists who admit that they have yet to successfully cure a patient.

Now, think again of who is really benefiting from the pharmacological treatments of mental illness. The obvious answer–Marketers, Pill Pushers, Pharmaceutical companies, and even your doctor.

These testimonial further support the theory that social support, reduced social stigma, and an over all understanding of the mentally ill will better assist in a achieving an economically strong community, better than any doctor, psychiatrist, or drug can do.

Next time you go to visit your doctor, take a look around and see if thier office is smeared with free pens and magnets or posters that promote specific drugs and think twice when they hand you that expensive prescription and tell you that you need to take this medication to “just to be on the safe side”.

Educate yourself.

Who is Benifiting from the treatment of Mental Illness?

First I would like to state the difference between a psychologist and a psychiatrist.

• Psychologist: they primarily study the human mind and human behavior.  Their highest degree would be a Ph. D. They are NOT medical doctors!
• Psychiatrist: a physician who specializes in psychiatry and is certified in treating mental disorders. Their highest degree is an M. D. These professionals ARE medical doctors and can prescribe psychiatric medication, conduct physical examinations, as well as order and interpret laboratory tests and electroencephalograms.

The following video contains interviews with PSYCHIATRISTS from the 159th annual APA (American Psychiatric Association) convention in May of 2006 in Toronto, Canada.

So the real question here is… who is really benefiting from the ‘mentally ill’? Certainly not the patient.

How is the Federal Government involved in providing mental health services?

The Center for Mental Health Services (CMHS) awards grants to States and localities to promote quality, accessible community-based mental health delivery systems with a range of treatment and support services. This means that states are responsible for obtaining grants in order to provide mental health care. If I’m not mistaken, when you apply for something, your usually competing with others for a limited supply of what ever it is you are trying to achieve, in this case its money to fund mental health services. This must mean then that states are competing against each other for ability to provide mental health care for their citizens. Does this seem right? Shouldn’t all people have equal access to health care within the same nation? Why should it vary between states?

In April 2002, President Bush also established the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. The Commission is to conduct a comprehensive study of the United States mental health service delivery system, including both the private and public sector providers, and advise the President on methods for improving the system. To learn more about the President’s New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, please visit the web site: www.mentalhealthcommission.gov.

According to www.mentalhealthcommission.gov the spending for 2002 in the department of Health and Human Services was $459.4 billion nationwide. But is all this money really going to the places where it’s needed most? This department consists of the following divisions:

Food and Drug Administration; Health Resources and Services Administration; Indian Health Service; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; National Institutes of Health; Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration; Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Administration for Children and Families; Administration on Aging; Office of the Secretary; Office of the Inspector General; and Program Support Center.

As much money that is going to these health care divisions, people are still paying out of their own pockets just to stay covered by such divisions like medicare. It is my view that because governmental screw up are alot easier to hide then state screw ups, state screw ups are more visible.

Just this last Thursday (February 28th, 2008) the U.S. Department of health and human services released to the press information regarding the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) program identifying $371.5 million in improper medicare payments in three states. These payments have been collected from or repaid to health care providers and suppliers as part of a demonstration program using recovery audit contractors (RACs) in California, Florida and New York in 2007. Nearly $440 million has been collected since the program began in 2005.

According to http://www.whitehouse.gov the Health and Human Services (HHS) are putting their efforts mainly into Fighting Bioterrorism, the National Institutes of Health (Research), Community Health, and Medicare and Medicaid enhancing programs. The only mention that they give about mental illness is in correlation with drug abuse, and it is a know fact that not ALL mental illnesses are caused by drug abuse and it sickens me that the government lumps them together like that.

The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), in partnership with states and local communities, aids the nation’s effort to prevent and treat mental illness and substance abuse. The budget funds the treatment of mental illness and the prevention and treatment of substance abuse.

A recent evaluation of SAMHSA’s Projects for Assistance in Transition from Homelessness (PATH) found that the formula grant is effective in helping states expand community mental health services, alcohol and drug treatment, and support services for homeless individuals facing a serious mental illness. Building on this success, the budget includes additional funds for PATH to reach out to 163,000 homeless individuals to help them recover from mental illness and substance abuse, find housing, and gain meaningful employment.

Out of the entire spending for the HHS Department mental health is only referred to once in correlation with substance abuse.