On 1 July 2014
…the Mental Health Complaints Commission began operating in Victoria.
Since that time, the Commission has been heavily criticised for underperformance and a lack of transparency.
Now the Commission is taking me (and Victorians) to court to suppress the release of important data.
Data that reveals how they and mental health services are performing.
Data that you have a right to.
Therefore, it is important that we start a conversation on what has worked in Victoria. And what hasn’t.
After all…if we made a mistake in Victoria, you wouldn’t want to as well.
Victoria’s Mental Health Complaints Commissioner
The Victorian Commission was the first of its kind in Australia. Set up to protect human rights where other agencies failed, the Commission was granted the most comprehensive powers of any Mental Health Commission in Australia.
…but after years, people started to wonder…
…what actually happens when I make a complaint?
A bit has happened since the Commission started.
$27.4
million
It has expended $27 498 169 since 2014-2015.
This number is based on annual report figures. Full budgets were not reported in the MHCC annual report as they were consolidated into Department of Health budgetary processes.
14 000+ complaints
It has had well over 14 000 complaints about issues in the mental health system, including grave human rights abuses.
7 undertakings
It has accepted 7 undertakings by services to remedy breaches of the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic).
During the Commission’s oversight of the mental health system, there has been extensive evidence of human rights breaches.
-
Independent evidence has highlighted that practice operates largely outside the law. The Royal Commission queried whether authorised psychiatrists even consider their legal obligations.
-
Mental health laws - which already violate human rights - are applied in a discriminatory manner. This was most visibly illustrated in the case of PBU & NJE v Mental Health Tribunal.
-
Gendered and sexual violence is still commonly reported in Victoria’s mental health units. Experiences of violence while in the ‘care’ of the state represent inhumane and degrading treatment when deprived of liberty.
-
Advance statements are commonly reported as being ignored. Very often services fail to properly file them.
-
Any use of restrictive practices is a violation of someone’s human rights. Even though mental health laws permit them, large parts of Victoria’s mental health system use restrictive practices in ways not permitted by law.
-
One of the most commonly reported experiences within the mental health system is a negative experience of power and control.
Numerous reports and individual stories continue to characterise a system that dehumanises as it violates human rights.
-
All people have a right to care that responds to their circumstances, identity and needs. Special duties are required to comply with Aboriginal Cultural Rights for Aboriginal Victorians. These rights are commonly violated through culturally unsafe mental health assessments and treatments.
‘When I got to the hospital, I was not assessed for three days. I was eventually put in front of a psychiatrist. I felt like I was railroaded and bullied by him. He had five other people there – I was never asked if I wanted them there. I was not allowed an advocate, a support person, or to record the conversation. When I demanded a support person, I was given a nurse, but the nurses never advocated for me, they just sit there silently’
Your story, your say
While some people have positive experiences of the public mental health system, people’s reports of human rights issues are common. These are some of their words…
‘[I]t was not uncommon to be left knocking on a window for 30 minutes or more to gain access to one’s room. Rooms were ransacked daily searching for unknown contraband. Nurses referred to the psychiatrists as “demigods”’ who were not to be argued with.’
Your story, your say
‘One minute I’m being restrained, not listened to, gas-lit by a service… A couple of weeks later, I’m in Canberra speaking with Bill Shorten on the NDIS.’
Via the Age
‘“I chewed my way through the restraints in front of two security guards who were laughing at me… One of them [security guards at the hospital] said: ‘if you really wanted to kill yourself, you should have tried harder’’’
Via the Guardian
As a reminder, the Commission has had…
…well in excess of 14000 complaints highlighting the human rights issues.
This
many
complaints.
The Commission has the power to direct services to follow the law where there is evidence of breaches.
So how many compliance notices to follow the law, do you think the Commission has issued for breaches of the Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic) during this human rights crisis?
In the 14 000 complaints to the Commission over 9 years, the number of compliance notices to follow the law are…
…want to take a guess?
Zero.
An inactive Commission has profound impacts on people’s lives.
Truthfully, some consumers and carers report positive experiences with the Commission. One of the most commonly reported positive experiences are the respectful language and engagement by staff. However, many consumers have been telling the Commission, government and Ministers about the failure of the Commission to address human rights issues for years. Here are some of their words.
‘Nothing changed.’
Internal feedback obtained under FOI, ORIMA
‘‘I have sought help and refuge from the mental health services. I made a complaint to the Mental Health Complaints Commissioner, after being entertained by them that I would be taken seriously. But the real issues were not addressed, because neither the MHCC or the service were willing to acknowledge the harm that they have caused me. The service was meant to sit down with me and engage in the kind of collaborative conversation about my experiences that I needed. This never happened on anything except what they chose. It was to fulfill a formality.’
Your story, your say
‘what is the point of [an] investigative body if it has no authority?’
Internal feedback obtained under FOI, ORIMA. It is important to note that it does, in fact, have authority. It has not used it. It is unclear why consumers and carers are being led to believe it does not.
‘I tried to get help, but no one cares’
Internal feedback obtained under FOI, ORIMA
Evidence suggests that consumers and carers are concluding that the Commission does not make a material difference to their circumstances or to the broader mental health system.
only 26%
of people who made a complaint felt that it made a positive difference for others. This is down from 65% in 2020.
only 24%
of people who made a complaint felt that it made a positive difference for them personally. This is down from 54% in 2020.
The sector and consumers have communicated this to the current and several previous Mental Health Ministers for several years. The current Minister has chosen to absorb the current Commission into the new Mental Health and Wellbeing Commission, largely unchanged.
This new Commission begins 1 September this year. Before that, on 21 August, the Commission is commencing legal action to appeal a decision by the Office of the Victorian Information Commissioner to release the recommendations they make to improve mental health services. The Minister and Commission are fighting against transparency, rather than fighting for a better mental health system.
The Victorian Greens and the Victorian National party have spoken out on this issue.
Greens MP Tim Read stated:
‘Trying to suppress this stuff doesn’t fill anyone with confidence that effort is being made to fix the problem’
Reaffirming OVIC’s original decision that said privacy could be reasonably protected while still sharing the recommendations, Read said:
‘If they say it can’t be done, then they’re not trying hard enough.’
Emma Keally MP (Nationals) stated:
‘…Labor is failing these workers by ignoring the royal commission’s priority recommendations around workforce and increased transparency around Victoria’s mental health crisis’.
The Commission is denying Victorians a better mental health system.
There are two simple steps that both the Commission and the Minister can take to fix the problem.