Re: “B.C. schools get $2M for mental-health programs,” Nov. 22.
I felt quite frustrated to read this article.
It reminded me of my first psychiatric social work job in 1964. It was at the Victoria Child Guidance Clinic.
At that time, services for children were very well integrated, with interdisciplinary reviews of families served, which included public-health nurses and family doctors, who contributed at each child’s conference.
Each elementary school had a public-health-nurse on site, and the junior and senior highs had designated nurses part time, usually two or three days a week.
The teachers met regularly with each school’s nurse, discussing children whose difficulties at school might suggest discussion with the families about possible causes.
A couple of decades later, this was referred to as early intervention.
Each family was involved from the start and services were offered as needed.
The conferences also had input from the family doctor and other professionals, such as psychologists, as appropriate.
Then came the changes. For budgetary reasons, the nurses’ hours were cut. Later, public-health budgets were cut further and the nurses were no longer in the clinic or the schools.
This pattern continued. An innovative and well-researched program for kids and families with mental-health problems was announced with much fanfare. After a few years, and perhaps because of change in government (but not always), the program would disappear.
The expertise developed by the former staff was lost as they moved on to other positions. There was little chance for the families involved to be referred to other counsellors. It was terribly disappointing every time.
My career spanned 42 years. I saw far too many of these stops and starts.
I was not personally involved in any such chopping and changing, but I met several adult clients with mental illness who were victims of the process.
Over the years, I met children of people who were clients of our Child Guidance Clinic, who were sent to the provincial mental hospital because there were insufficient resources locally. This was repeated again and again.
The situation was worse in smaller towns.
Of course, I hold good wishes for all those involved in this new initiative.
I can’t help but think, though, of so many similar previous announcements. And what resulted.
It would be great if the present program planners could research from the start the various interventions and how best to ensure the programs get a good chance to be carefully and consistently nurtured, so that their promise can be realized.
Gail Simpson
Esquimalt
