Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Voluntary services should supplement care, not replace it

  • Comments (2)

It was not a big surprise to me to read that mental health budgets have fallen by 8% in real terms during the term of this government.

But I was surprised to hear care secretary Norman Lamb’s reasoning around this decline in funding. According to the BBC, he explained that budgets were “not the full picture” and that “mental health care is given through a range of services including the voluntary sector.”

True, voluntary services such as mental health helplines offer invaluable support for people when they are at crisis point and do a fantastic job. But funding has been cut here too.

How can he possibly imply that volunteers are now providing mental health care so therefore  it’s okay to cut budgets?

“The voluntary sector offers services that are vastly helpful to service users”

The voluntary sector offers services that are vastly helpful to service users but they cannot replace the work done by a community mental health team or by regular psychiatry appointments. Voluntary services should supplement care, not replace.

It is reassuring to hear that new standards for mental health services are being introduced and will be underwritten with some investment. But Norman Lamb’s comments give a worrying insight into a future where volunteers are relied on more and more to provide the type of care that should be given by healthcare professionals.

  • Comments (2)

Readers' comments (2)

  • michael stone

    I agree with the above piece, and it is worth making a further comment.

    I have heard various people recently, arguing that if more care is to be provided by the voluntary sector, then somehow 'the sector needs more public support'. That made me recall someone from the hospice sector, who said something like 'We don't want money from the Goverment - if we rely on Goverment money instead of donations, then the Goverment will also seek to impose controls and objectives on us: it is our independence from the state, that gives us the freedom to do the right things'.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Anonymous

    in answer to the headline, absolutely and what I have said all along. too much reliance on voluntary work 'deresponsibilises' (sorry probably my English translation from the French and no time to look it up right now, but it seems self-explanatory) the state of the provision of adequate volume, accessibility and quality of service.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment.

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.