Psychologists and mental health professionals have called on the federal government to reverse a decision to cut subsidised mental health sessions in half.
The change, which took effect from January 1 will see subsidised psychology sessions drop from 20 per year to 10. This change has reverted the subsidised mental health sessions back to what it was pre-COVID.
In December last year, health minister Mark Butler cited an independent review of the Better Access Program by the University of Melbourne and claimed that doubling the number of subsidised psychology sessions had led to “aggravated” waitlists and barriers to access.
Butler said while the Better Access program had led to positive outcomes for those accessing the scheme, it had also left several new patients behind, with “widening gaps” for those in lower socio-economic backgrounds including those from regional, rural, or remote areas.
“The report shows Better Access is failing some Australians. Gap fees and wait times make it inaccessible and unaffordable for too many. The most disadvantaged Australians – those among us with the greatest need – have the least access to mental health services”, Butler said.
10 sessions insufficient for treating patients
NSW Health Minister Mark Butler. Photo: Twitter.
Australian Clinical Psychology Association (ACPA) president Professor Caroline Hunt criticised the government’s plan, stating that the review found that 10 psychological sessions were insufficient for treating patients.
“These cuts won’t just mean reduced access to vital care; in some cases psychologists may have to turn away vulnerable patients with more complex mental health conditions because we know delivering only half the required treatment will not provide beneficial outcomes. This is an enormous ethical dilemma for mental health professionals”, Hunt said.
The Australian Psychological Society (APS) noted that the independent review had actually recommended that “the additional 10 sessions should continue to be made available and should be targeted towards those with complex mental health needs”.
The APS stated that the government’s decision has gone against their “extensive advocacy efforts as a community and profession to have the additional sessions made permanent.”
A public statement by the APS reported that over one million additional sessions were provided by psychologists in the 2021-22 financial year. The reduction of services and access to psychological treatment via these additional sessions has been viewed by medical health professionals as one that will “compromise mental health care for Australians, making this announcement all the more disappointing, at a time of great financial strain for many.”
As reported by The Sydney Morning Herald, Mental Health Australia chair Matt Berriman denounced the cut to Medicare-subsidised psychology sessions, demanding the government to come up with a long-term plan for the health industry.
“The new government should make mental health a key priority, which has seemed to have been lost since taking power. Where’s Labor’s plan for mental health in this country?” Berriman asked.
According to a 2022 report by the Jean Hailes National Women’s Health, 46 per cent of women reported their mental health had declined since the beginning of the pandemic, while 21 per cent said their mental health had resulted in their withdrawal from everyday activities.
An op-ed by Doctor Caroline Hunt and Christopher Lee declared that The Australian Clinical Psychology Association took several proposals to the Albanese government which intended to address waiting lists for psychology services and improve access to care for Australians.
“We proposed bolstering incentives to move clinicians to rural and regional Australia; providing stepped care models so people with the most complex need received the greatest care; adequately funding university postgraduate positions; and ensuring training opportunities for the next generation of psychologists”, they wrote.
They criticised the government’s move to apply a “blanket cut to care” which was at odds with advice from all expert organisations within their profession and comes “without acknowledgement of the many workforce and patient-access proposals put forward by experts in the field.”
