When Policy Goes Mad

We were warned as social work students in the early nineties that when politicians no longer had to run the Telecommunications, Power, Water and Prison systems/organisation's then all they would have to do is make policy.

The assertion of ACC to make sexual abuse counselling defined by mental health paradigms a pre-requisite for 'professional counselling' is naive to say the least. This sort of policy creates another possibility of shutting down someone's journey to wellness - makes wellbeing more difficult - pathologises the survivor of abuse - putting quite symbolically some sort of onus of responsibility onto the abusee. Its a stewpid policy thats a fact. What do you think?

As a community worker now for some 15 years I know a thing or two, and one thing i know is sexual abuse cannot be redefined as a mental health issue - its more than that and nor can the effects of rape / molestation be separated from the physical, spiritual and family wellbeing(and societal! cultural).

Anyways there is never a one response fits all response - this is something else i know but i suppose more and more there's this move to have one world view, some type of uniformed medical-model response, one policy no matter how ill-informed, driving sexual abuse into the realms of madness (we survive it without madness thats a f_ _ _ f a c t!) yep fact!!- and this moot to 'DSM-4' rape and molestation in order for counselling be supported in any way is so ONE EYED its stupid.

Are we more informed - smarter than we were 200 years ago? Is this the information age and thus we are and can be 'more' enlightened?

Hmmm - when policy goes mad there are rippling effects -
cos with sexual abuse not only is there a serious encroachment committed by a person on another person, but now an institution charged to insure our wellness as a society then revictimises and pathlogises the survivor through DSM-4 definitions and/or prescriptions is problematic for many peoples surviving sexual abuse.

blah blah

Stupid

Politicans need some organisations to run, roll their sleeves up and rewire so-called private organisations to their original owners - THE PUBLIC.

Anywayz what do you think???