6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Protecting mental health during periods of financial stress: Evidence from the Australian Coronavirus Supplement income support payment

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This paper investigates whether the Australian government's Coronavirus Supplement, a temporary income support payment for unemployed jobseekers during the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, protected mental health (frequency of feeling anxious or depressed during the past week) by lowering financial stress (how comfortable people are in paying for essential services). We use unique nationally representative repeated cross-sectional data on 3843 unemployed Australian adults over the period April 6, 2020 to May 10, 2021. We find that the Coronavirus Supplement payment significantly reduced reported financial stress, and lower financial stress was associated with lower mental distress. Though the Coronavirus Supplement was designed to reduce financial stress, we find the Supplement was also successful in protecting community mental health indirectly via its ability to reduce financial stress. The findings provide support for income support packages to protect mental health during economic shocks. However, transitory support measures also tend have short-lived positive effects on mental health, suggesting that more permanent income support reform may have longer-term mental health benefits.

          Related collections

          Most cited references20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Mental health of people in Australia in the first month of COVID ‐19 restrictions: a national survey

          Abstract Objectives To estimate the population prevalence of clinically significant symptoms of depression, generalised anxiety, thoughts of being better off dead, irritability, and high optimism about the future, and of direct experience of COVID‐19, loss of employment caused by COVID‐19 restrictions, worry about contracting COVID‐19, or major disadvantage because of the restrictions; to examine the relationship between these experiences and reporting mental symptoms. Design, setting, participants Anonymous online survey of adult Australian residents, 3 April – 2 May 2020. Main outcome measures Self‐reported psychological status during the preceding fortnight assessed with the Patient Health Questionnaire 9 (PHQ‐9; symptoms of depression) and the Generalised Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD‐7). Optimism about the future was assessed with a 10‐point study‐specific visual analogue scale. Results 13 829 respondents contributed complete response data. The estimated prevalence of clinically significant symptoms of depression (PHQ‐9 ≥ 10) was 27.6% (95% CI, 26.1–29.1%) and of clinically significant symptoms of anxiety (GAD‐7 ≥ 10) 21.0% (95% CI, 19.6–22.4%); 14.6% of respondents (95% CI, 13.5–16.0%) reported thoughts of being better off dead or self‐harm (PHQ‐9, item 9) on at least some days and 59.2% (95% CI, 57.6–60.7%) that they were more irritable (GAD‐7, item 6). An estimated 28.3% of respondents (95% CI, 27.1–29.6%) reported great optimism about the future (score ≥ 8). People who had lost jobs, were worried about contracting COVID‐19, or for whom the restrictions had a highly adverse impact on daily life were more likely to report symptoms of depression or anxiety, and less likely to report high optimism than people without these experiences. Conclusions Mental health problems were widespread among Australians during the first month of the stage two COVID‐19 restrictions; in addition, about one‐quarter of respondents reported mild to moderate symptoms of depression or anxiety. A public mental health response that includes universal, selective and indicated clinical interventions is needed.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            The Effect of COVID-19 on Mental Health and Wellbeing in a Representative Sample of Australian Adults

            There is minimal knowledge about the impact of large-scale epidemics on community mental health, particularly during the acute phase. This gap in knowledge means we are critically ill-equipped to support communities as they face the unprecedented COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to provide data urgently needed to inform government policy and resource allocation now and in other future crises. The study was the first to survey a representative sample from the Australian population at the early acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Depression, anxiety, and psychological wellbeing were measured with well-validated scales (PHQ-9, GAD-7, WHO-5). Using linear regression, we tested for associations between mental health and exposure to COVID-19, impacts of COVID-19 on work and social functioning, and socio-demographic factors. Depression and anxiety symptoms were substantively elevated relative to usual population data, including for individuals with no existing mental health diagnosis. Exposure to COVID-19 had minimal association with mental health outcomes. Recent exposure to the Australian bushfires was also unrelated to depression and anxiety, although bushfire smoke exposure correlated with reduced psychological wellbeing. In contrast, pandemic-induced impairments in work and social functioning were strongly associated with elevated depression and anxiety symptoms, as well as decreased psychological wellbeing. Financial distress due to the pandemic, rather than job loss per se, was also a key correlate of poorer mental health. These findings suggest that minimizing disruption to work and social functioning, and increasing access to mental health services in the community, are important policy goals to minimize pandemic-related impacts on mental health and wellbeing. Innovative and creative strategies are needed to meet these community needs while continuing to enact vital public health strategies to control the spread of COVID-19.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Mental health affects future employment as job loss affects mental health: findings from a longitudinal population study

              Background Workforce participation is a key feature of public mental health and social inclusion policies across the globe, and often a therapeutic goal in treatment settings. Understanding the reciprocal relationship between participation and mental health has been limited by inadequate research methods. This is the first study to simultaneously examine and contrast the relative effects of unemployment on mental health and mental health on employment status in a single general population sample. Method Data were from working-age respondents (20 to 55 years at baseline) who completed nine waves of the Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) Survey (N=7176). Cross-lagged path analyses were used to test the lagged and concurrent associations between unemployment and mental health over time, adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics. Results Mental health was shown to be both a consequence of and risk factor for unemployment. Thus, the poorer mental health observed amongst people who are not working is attributable to both the impact of unemployment and existing mental health problems. While the strength of these two effects was similar for women, the results for men suggested that the effect of unemployment on subsequent mental health was weaker than the effect of mental health on subsequent risk of unemployment. Conclusion Disentangling the reciprocal links between mental health and workforce participation is central to the development and success of clinical goals and health and social policies that aim to promote either aspect. This study demonstrates that both effects are important and supports concurrent responses to prevent a cycle of disadvantage and entrenched social exclusion.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Soc Sci Med
                Soc Sci Med
                Social Science & Medicine (1982)
                Elsevier Ltd.
                0277-9536
                1873-5347
                18 June 2022
                August 2022
                18 June 2022
                : 306
                : 115158
                Affiliations
                [a ]Melbourne Institute: Applied Economic & Social Research, The University of Melbourne, Australia
                [b ]ARC Centre of Excellence for Children and Families over the Life Course, Australia
                [c ]Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Australia
                [d ]Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), Bonn, Germany
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author. 111 Barry Street, Level 5 Carlton, VIC 3052, Australia.
                Article
                S0277-9536(22)00464-6 115158
                10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.115158
                9212744
                35751987
                1c61b049-bb63-4890-982a-432db8c6d2bd
                © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 14 February 2022
                : 13 June 2022
                : 16 June 2022
                Categories
                Article

                Health & Social care
                mental health,financial stress,coronavirus,income support,australia
                Health & Social care
                mental health, financial stress, coronavirus, income support, australia

                Comments

                Comment on this article