Recent
Developments Regarding Psychiatry in The Netherlands
Arjan Dokelaar, July 9, 2011
Dear editor,
I would hereby like to inform you about recent developments regarding
psychiatry in The Netherlands. The Dutch government has approved a proposal by
Minister Edith Schippers of Health, Welfare and Sport to cut
psychiatric care by 593 million euros. The minister presented the package of
measures at a press conference in Nieuwspoort on june 10th during which she
stated the following:
"should you not figure out sertain things that belong to life in your own social circle and should you not call on healthcare if you really have a disease?"
Video: http://nos.nl/video/247432-forse-kritiek-op-bezuinigingsplannen-geestelijke-gezondheidszorg.html
It is clear that the measure is not meant purely financial and that the
validity of psychiatric diagnosis is being questioned.
The industry associations of psychiatry, including mental health care Netherlands , the Dutch Association of Psychiatry (NVvP) and National Forum for Mental Health (LPGGz) scream bloody
murder. They try to whip patients into protest against the government by
stating that the measure is discriminating them and calling them victims of
"inhuman" and "stigmatizing" government measures.
Quote:
|
"These proposed cuts discriminatory shoot us down the wrong way here and we will therefore vigorously protest. Why do patients with severe or chronic mental illness or a personal contribution and patients with severe chronic medical condition or not? Furthermore, and have savings in mental health care at the expense of the patient, the alternative is for structural interventions that more savings potential profits, such as the removal of barriers and streamline the financing of care, "said Rutger Jan van der Gaag, chairman of the Dutch Association of Psychiatry (NVvP). |
The measure will however only target exceeded allowed growth and will actually improving care.
There is a Dutch saying "who pays decides". The own contribution that
is now demanded for psychiatric care ensures that, in general, (serious)
psychiatric abuse will automaticly be prevented and it wil possibly cause
innovation that leads to effective alternatives for psychiatry which are now
not able to get a foothold because they are being supressed by the autority of
the psychiatric medical dogma. The patient becomes partly Mr. bread, giving
them a greater say in their treatment.
Already in 2009, the then Minister of Health Ab Klink called for a cut of 120 million euros and also
then came the psychiatric profession in revolt. They filed suit to the then
Minister which they lost.
In the lawsuit the professional groups claimed that the measure would reduce
the quality of care for patients and that "it was not their fault"
that demand for psychiatric care was rising.
Quote:
|
"Demand [for psychiatric care] has increased and
therefore more on care. But that's not our fault? We also believe that
the Minister have nothing to do. This is between us, the care authority and
the health insurers, "said Marleen Barth, president of GGZ Netherlands.
"We follow the announced measure critical of the minister. It has no
effect on its own budget, "confirms a spokesman for the Dutch Health
Care Authority. |
Less than
three months after the trial mental health care Netherlands (GGZ Nederland)
started a million dollar national propaganda campaign called "1 in 4"
to lower the threshold for psychiatric care ( www.1opde4.nl ) This campaign was a shortly later banned by the Advertising Code Commission because it was
misleading and proclaimed falsehoods.
Page size advertisements in major newspapers
The psychiatrists had clearly different interests than those of patients. They tried to escalate the problems in order to safeguard their future. How can you justify that you claim in a lawsuit that a announced cut results in lower quality care for patients while you soon after invest milions of dollars in propaganda by company "Maximum Recruitment Advertising" (see domain owner 1opde4.nl) to recruit more patients?
In reality,
it were the politicians who handled in the best interests of patients. It were
they who for years have fought to constrain serious psychiatric human rights
abuses - such as consecutive years imprisonment in solitary confinement. It
were they who publicly spoke disgrace of it and it were they who sought
solutions and also, if necessary, forced them with the profession.
Minister Klink has also repeatedly expressed his displeasure over the course of
events in psychiatry and announced that measures would come.
The financial measures should be seen in the right context and it is important
to realize that politicians have for years struggled against malpractice in
psychiatry based on their own ideological foundations.
Below are some references:
- Halbe Zijlstra (VVD), "mental blackmail scandals to
hide"
- Advertising Code: GGZ Netherlands misleading propaganda
campaign
- Koser Kaya (D66) suggests isolation treatment denounced
parliamentary questions in
I
hope this information is valuable for you.
Best Regards,
Arjan Dokelaar
The Netherlands