Introduction
The health of citizens is the main aim of any country because it ensures that the workforce is in good shape to contribute to the economy of the country. In this regard, every government tries to put in place mechanisms that will increase the quality of health that people receive. It has been noted that Australian males live for relatively longer years compared to other males in the world. Nevertheless, compared to their women, Australian males live for shorter years.
On the same note, the health standards of Australian males differ from group to group. Therefore, the government came up with the National Male Health Policy Australia (2010). The policy aims at meeting the specific needs of different male groups which have been proven to be distinctive to every group. Moreover, the policy is designed in a way that makes health information available to health professionals, society and all males in an easy way. Policy analysis is important in ensuring that the policy is all-encompassing and addresses all the pending issues.
Rationale for Analysis
The policy is supposed to address the inequality of health services between men and women. The idea that women live longer on average compared to men raised questions that needed answers. Similarly, there was a need to decide how much finances each part of the divide would receive. The areas that are crucial for the success of the policy require higher funding (Buse, Mays & Walt 2005). Most importantly, consultations with the people that would be affected by the policy were crucial. Without proper involvement of the people, the success of any policy remains vague.
Consultations with Concerned Groups
In developing the policy, the concerned groups were consulted to ensure that the policy would be all-inclusive. In this regard, the government conducted surveys to gather health information from these people and use it to formulate the policy (Biddle 2012). Consequently, around 1300 people from various parts of Australia and various groups of people were involved in the surveys. However, it is quite difficult to say that a sample of 1300 people will truly represent the views of the majority in a country (Taylor 2013). Consequently, the government conducted public forums all over the country to ensure that the views sought came from as many people as possible (Blazina & Shen-Miller 2010). It should be known that if feedback is collected from the majority of the people, then all issues can easily be addressed.
The second most important group in the formation of the National Male Health Policy Australia (2010) comprises the various health professionals. The professionals were drawn from every aspect of the health sector which caters for men. It is important to note that much as males are the subject of the policy, it is the health professionals who are tasked with the duty of implementing the policy (Blue & Wilkinson 2002).
In this regard, the government-held consultations with various health experts to ensure that all health issues are taken into consideration. The other group that was consulted comprised of the various corporations both governmental and non-governmental organizations as well as private corporations. These organizations usually buy health insurance for their employees and the extent of the cover is an issue decided by the management (Nay & Garratt 2009).
The Policy and Equity
Since it has been noted that women in Australia have relatively good health compared to their men counterparts, the policy is essential in ensuring equity in the health of both men and women. It should be noted that it is unfair to have different health standards for men and women or even among men of different groups. This needs to be addressed so that every person can have equal opportunities to advance themselves (Carrin, Buse, Haggenhougen & Quah 2010).
Economic Aspect
Policies require some money to be implemented. This money usually comes from the public coffers and the effect is felt by the common taxpayer. As a result, any policy formulated should be worth its cost. The national male health policy Australia 2010 is a $16 million policy (Cheung, Mirzaei & Leeder 2010). Additionally, there is a budget of $3 million to cater for the male shed movement (Byrne & Neville 2009).
Nevertheless, the policy is crucial in ensuring that men’s health standards are enhanced. On the same note, to make health information available to the targeted group, finances have to be provided. Moreover, research should be financed to enhance health services offered to people. However, there are various issues including primary prevention that has not been considered in funding yet are very crucial (Kebede-Francis 2010). Consequently, there needs to be a serious revisit of the mode of funding and determination of areas that require more funding.
Advantages of the Policy
The policy would not have come at a better time. There are very many issues that affect men of all ages that the policy will have to counter. To begin with, men have unique health requirements that need a specific measure to address them. However, since time immemorial, men have been bundled together with women as far as health issues are concerned (Marmot 2012). Given the affirmative action all over the world that has increased concern on issues of women, many health professionals have been oblivious of the fact that men also require specific treatment. As a result, male health profile has been deteriorating over time compared to that of women in Australia (Bowl, Tobias, Leahy, Ferguson & Gage 2013). This is a serious area of concern that needs to be addressed by the policy.
On the same note, reports on the rates of suicide in Australia shows that more men commit suicide both in the urban and rural areas as compared to that women. This has been attributed to the lack of health information especially mental health information to men. While women have a lot of places and institutions where they can go and seek help when they are faced with various problems including family conflicts, no such services were available to men hitherto. As a result, when men have social and psychological problems they have nobody to talk to which leads to depression making them so disdainful of life thus high rates of suicide (Elder, Evans & Nizette 2012). This information is made available by the policy and it is expected it will have a great impact.
Similarly, Australia has been having a national women’s health policy since 1989 which has been specifically addressing women issues (Dunbar & Peach 2012). This has helped in fueling the disparities in health between men and women. Moreover, there have been increased cases of domestic violence against men in Australian society. This problem becomes worse because there have been no institutions where men can get help or policies that address the issue.
On the same note, men are always assigned more risky duties in their places of work compared to women. As a result, most accidents that occur in various workplaces involve men. In this regard, the policy is a great step forward in male health given the fact that it addresses many of the issues that affect men (Gomm, Lincoln, Pikora & Giles-Corti 2006).
Moreover, it is important to note that various population groups of men have different health requirements. However, previously all issues to do with men have been approached uniformly. This has escalated the inequity witnessed concerning health matters of men (Grace & Deal 2012). Nevertheless, the policy has devised ways of addressing unique population group needs so that each group can have enhanced health services. Similarly, different age groups of men require specific health services which cannot be mixed. The policy has distinguished these needs and addresses them separately.
Policy Evaluation
The policy has outlined some key areas where it will concentrate to promote health. The first aim is to ensure the best health for Australian men. Much as men and women are human beings who share many things, they have a different biological make-up that demands a unique approach (Willis, Reynolds & Keleher 2008). Both the community and nature have differentiated men and women along with various aspects.
However, though women have had their special needs addressed, men have always been left to fight their way out. In line with the Ottawa Charter for Health’s key area of creating supportive environments, the policy will provide differentiated health services that will enhance health. The policy has prioritized the special needs of men. On the same note, the health service providers are encouraged to be friendly to patients and try to understand their conditions. This is expected to increase the confidence of men in seeking health services (Guthrie & Walter 2013). It should be noted that men are known to be very unwilling to reveal some of their problems. Moreover, matters that can make various groups of men feel discriminated against should be avoided.
The policy insists on understanding the issues that led to pronounced health inequality among various population groups in Australia (Logan & Kingston 2012). In addition, the policy seeks to involve people from all backgrounds when making decisions about the health of people thus increasing the chances of including every unique need (Helmchen, Kaestner & Sasso 2008). Furthermore, the policy proposes the inclusion of the disadvantaged groups and the minority to ensure that the health information can reach as many men as possible. Through this idea, the process of ensuring the availability of health information would be made quite easier (Kassoko-Lasaki, Cook & O’Brien 2009). This will strengthen the community action towards health as required by Ottawa Charter for Health.
Preventive health is quite crucial in ensuring that various health conditions are avoided in advance. On the same note, preventing various diseases help in reducing the costs incurred by people in visiting hospitals. Moreover, this helps in avoiding the costs of buying medicines in case one falls sick. The policy advocates for male awareness regarding preventable diseases and health conditions (Kissoon K, Larson & Kissoon N 2012).
This includes informing men on the risk factors of various diseases which are highly likely to attack men. Moreover, preventable health includes making the information about where to get a specific type of help available to men. It should be noted that one of the five key areas that are critical for health promotion as per the Ottawa Charter for Health, is preventive tailored health care services.
Another major point of focus for the national male health policy is ensuring that there is enough evidence to make informed decisions regarding health policies. The policy proposes to achieve this through investing in research on health issues that affect men in Australia, thus enhancing personal skills as outlined by the Ottawa Charter for Health (Greig, Lewins & white 2003). Emphasis is given to the men living in rural areas and those from minority groups. Collection of data on various social issues that influence the health of men is also crucial in enhancing evidence. This will also involve continuous measurement of the impact of the policy itself on the health of men in Australia. This will help the government to adjust the policy accordingly thus effectively meeting the aims of the policy (Peerson & Saunders 2011).
Conclusion
The health of men has been neglected for a long period. While the issues of women were taken care of a very long time ago, men have been struggling to access some services. Violence rates against men whether domestically or otherwise are very high. Special needs of men in different age groups as well as population groups have been in the dustbin of oblivion hitherto. Moreover, health information concerning men conditions has been hard to find. Additionally, there has been little and scanty evidence to influence informed decision making. The national male health policy is therefore very crucial and comes at a good time to help in tackling all these issues about male health.
Reference List
Biddle, N 2012, ‘Measures of Indigenous Social Capital and their Relationship with Well-being’, Australian Journal of Rural Health, vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 298-304.
Blazina, C & Shen-Miller DS 2010, An International Psychology of Men: Theoretical Advances, Case Studies, and Clinical Innovations, Routledge, London.
Blue, I & Wilkinson, D 2002, The New Rural Health, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Bowl, M, Tobias, R, Leahy, J, Ferguson, G & Gage, J 2013, Gender, Masculinities and Lifelong Learning, Routledge, London.
Buse, K, Mays, N & Walt, G 2005, Doing policy analysis: Making health policy 2005, Open University Press, Maidenhead, pp. 175-191.
Byrne, GJ & Neville, C 2009, Community Mental Health for Older People, Elsevier Australia, Chatswood.
Carrin, G, buse, K, Heggenhougen, K & Quah SR 2010, Health systems Policy, Finance, and Organizations, Academic Press, Waltham.
Cheung, K, Mirzaei, M & Leeder, S 2010, ‘Health policy analysis: a tool to evaluate in policy documents the alignment between policy statements and intended outcomes’, Australian health review, vol. 34, no. 4, pp. 405-413.
Dunbar, JA & Peach E 2012, ‘The Disparity Called Rural Health: What is it, and what Needs to be done’, Australian Journal of Rural Health, vol. 20, no. 6, pp.290-292.
Elder, R, Evans, K & Nizette, D 2012, Psychiatric & Mental Health Nursing, Elsevier Health Sciences, Chatswood.
Gomm, M, Lincoln, P, Pikora, T & Giles-Corti, B 2006, ‘Planning and implementing a community-based public health advocacy campaign: a transport case study from Australia’, Health promotion international, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 284-292.
Grace, S & Deal M 2012, Remedial Message, Elsevier Australia, Chatswood.
Greig, A, Lewins, F & White, K 2003, Inequality in Australia, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Guthrie, J & Walter, M 2013, ‘The Positioning of Indigenous Australians as Health Care Recipients’, Australian Indigenous Health Bulletin, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 239-249.
Helmchen, L, Kaestner, R & Sasso AT 2008, Beyond Health Insurance: Public Policy to Improve Health, Emerald Group Publishing, Bingley.
Kebede-Francis, E 2010, Global Health Disparities: Closing the Gap Through Good Governance, Jones & Bartlett, Burlington.
Kissoon, k, Larson, C & Kissoon, N 2012, ‘Health Inequalities: Causes and Potential Solutions’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, vol. 36, no. 6, pp. 518-519.
Kossoko-Lasaki, S, Cook, CT & O’Brien, RL 2009, Cultural Proficiency in Addressing Health Disparities, Jones and Bartlett, Burlington.
Logan, C & Johnstone, L 2012, Managing Clinical Risk: A Guide to Effective Practice, Routledge, London.
Marmot, M 2012, ‘Health Equity: The Challenge, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health’, vol. 6, no. 6, pp. 513-514.
Nay, R & Garratt, S 2009, Older People: Issues and Innovations in Care, Elsevier Australia, Chatswood.
Peerson, A & Saunders, M 2011, ‘Men’s Health Literacy in Australia: In Search of a Gender Lens’, International Journal of Men’s Health, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 142-149.
Taylor, J 2013, ‘Overcoming the Isolation Experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Careers’, Australian Indigenous Health Bulletin, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 20-21.
Willis, E, Reynolds, LE & Keleher, H 2008, Understanding the Australian Health care System, Elsevier Australia, Chatswood.