Proposed anti-trolling law could be used to silence critics of the Australian government

Objective: To assess the impact, in the Australian setting, of the COVID-19 lockdown on antipsychotic supplies for patients with schizophrenia following a prescription from a new medical consultation when compared to the same periods in the previous 4 years. A secondary objective was to assess the volume of all antipsychotic supplies, from new and repeat prescriptions, over these same periods. Methods: A retrospective pharmaceutical claims database study was undertaken, using the Department of Human Services Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme 10% sample. The study population included all adult patients with three or more supplies of oral or long-acting injectable antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia at any time between 1 June 2015 and 31 May 2020. The primary outcome compared volumes of dispensed antipsychotics from new prescriptions (which require a medical consultation) between 1 April and 31 May each year from 2016 to 2020. This was to analyse the period during which the Australian Government imposed a lockdown due to COVID-19 (April to May 2020) when compared the same periods in previous years. Results: There was a small (5.7%) reduction in the number of antipsychotics dispensed from new prescriptions requiring a consultation, from 15,244 to 14,372, between April and May 2019 and the same period in 2020, respectively. However, this reduction was not statistically significant ( p = 0.75) after adjusting for treatment class, age, gender, location and provider type. Conclusion: The COVID-19 restrictions during April and May 2020 had no significant impact on the volume of antipsychotics dispensed from new prescriptions for patients with schizophrenia when compared to the volume of antipsychotics dispensed from new prescriptions during the same period in previous years.

Download Full-text

Examining the role of governmsent in shaping disability inclusiveness around COVID-19: a framework analysis of Australian guidelines

International Journal for Equity in Health ◽

10.1186/s12939-021-01506-2 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

Author(s):

David Colon-Cabrera ◽

Shivika Sharma ◽

Narelle Warren ◽

Dikaios Sakellariou

Keyword(s):

Federal Government ◽

Disability Services ◽

Federal State ◽

Structural Factors ◽

Australian Government ◽

Disabled People ◽

Framework Analysis ◽

Unemployed People ◽

Guidance Documents

Abstract Background The COVID-19 pandemic has uncovered the ways in which disabled people are made more vulnerable due to structural inequalities. These vulnerabilities are the result of the interaction between individual and structural factors that shape how risk is experienced by disabled people. In Australia, these vulnerabilities are influenced by the way disability services and care for disabled people are delivered through a consumer-directed approach. We analysed the policies and documentation made by the Australian Government and state and territory governments during the pandemic to explore whether these were disability-inclusive. We aimed to unpack how these policies shaped disabled people as vulnerable citizens. Methods Guided by documentary research, we used framework analysis to examine the policies of the Australian Government and state and territory governments. We analysed legislation that was given royal assent by the federal, state and territory governments, and documents (reports, fact sheets, guidance documents, etc.) published by the federal government and the state of Victoria (given that this state experienced the brunt of the epidemic in Australia) between February 2020 to August of 2020. Results We found that most of the resources were not aimed at disabled people, but at carers and workers within disability services. In addition, most policies formulated by the Australian Government were related to the expansion of welfare services and the creation of economic stimulus schemes. However, while the stimulus included unemployed people, the expansion of benefits explicitly excluded disabled people who were not employed. Most of the legislation and documents offered accessibility options, though most of these options were only available in English. Disability oriented agencies offered more extensive accessibility options. Conclusions The findings indicate a large number of documents addressing the needs of disabled people. However, disability-inclusiveness appeared to be inconsistent and not fully considered, leaving disabled people exposed to greater risk of COVID-19. Neoliberal policies in the health and welfare sector in Australia have led to an individualisation of the responsibility to remain healthy and a reliance on people as independent consumers. Governments need to take a clear stance towards the emergence of such a discourse that actively disvalues disabled people.

Download Full-text