Revising the National Ambient Air Quality Standards: The integration of science and policy

Under the Clean Air Act, Congress granted discretionary decision making authority to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This discretionary authority involves setting standards to protect the public's health with an "adequate margin of safety" based on current scientific knowledge. The Administrator of the EPA is usually not a scientist, and for the National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for particulate matter (PM), the Administrator faced the task of revising a standard when several scientific factors were ambiguous. These factors included: (1) no identifiable threshold below which health effects are not manifested, (2) no biological basis to explain the reported associations between particulate matter and adverse health effects, and (3) no consensus among the members of the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) as to what an appropriate PM indicator, averaging period, or value would be for the revised standard. ^ This project recommends and demonstrates a tool, integrated assessment (IA), to aid the Administrator in making a public health policy decision in the face of ambiguous scientific factors. IA is an interdisciplinary approach to decision making that has been used to deal with complex issues involving many uncertainties, particularly climate change analyses. Two IA approaches are presented; a rough set analysis by which the expertise of CASAC members can be better utilized, and a flag model for incorporating the views of stakeholders into the standard setting process. ^ The rough set analysis can describe minimal and maximal conditions about the current science pertaining to PM and health effects. Similarly, a flag model can evaluate agreement or lack of agreement by various stakeholder groups to the proposed standard in the PM review process. ^ The use of these IA tools will enable the Administrator to (1) complete the NAAQS review in a manner that is in closer compliance with the Clean Air Act, (2) expand the input from CASAC, (3) take into consideration the views of the stakeholders, and (4) retain discretionary decision making authority. ^

Policy analysis of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and federal funding concerning barrier-free playgrounds

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 was created to prohibit discrimination against disabled persons in our society. The goal of the ADA as a comprehensive civil rights law is to "ensure equal opportunity and complete participation, independent living and economic self-sufficiency" for disabled persons (U.S. Department of Justice, 2008). As part of Title II and III of the ADA, states and local governments are required to provide people with disabilities the same chance to engage in and benefit from all programs and services including recreational facilities and activities as every other citizen. Recreational facilities and related structures must comply with accessibility standards when creating new structures or renovating existing ones. Through a systematic literature review of articles accessed through online databases, articles relating to children with disabilities, their quality of life and their experience gained through play were reviewed, analyzed and synthesized. Additionally, the ADA's Final Rule regarding accessible playgrounds was evaluated through a descriptive analysis which yielded the following five components relating the importance of barrier-free playgrounds to children with disabilities: appropriate dimensions for children, integration of the play area, variety of activity and stimulation, availability of accessible play structures to communities, and financial feasibility. These components were used as evaluation criteria to investigate the degree to which the ADA's Final Rule document met these criteria. An evaluation of two federal funding sources, the Urban Parks and Recreation Renewal Program (UPARR) and the Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF), was also conducted which revealed three components relating the two programs' ability to support the realization of the ADA's Final Rule which included: current budget for the program, ability of local communities to attain funds, and level of ADA compliance required to receive funding. Majority of the evaluation of the Final Rule concluded it be adequate in development of barrier-free playgrounds although there are some portions of the guidelines that would benefit from further elucidation. Both funding programs were concluded to not adequately support the development of barrier-free playgrounds and therefore it was recommended that their funding be re-instated or increased as necessary. ^

AN ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT STATUS OF MENTAL ILLNESS IN BENDEL STATE OF NIGERIA: IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC MENTAL HEALTH POLICY AND EDUCATION

This descriptive study assesses the current status of mental illness in Bendel State of Nigeria to determine its implications for mental health policy and education. It is a study of the demographic characteristics of psychiatric patients in the only two modern western psychiatric facilities in Bendel State, the various treatment modalities utilized for mental illness, and the people's choice of therapeutic measures for mental illness in Bendel State.^ This study investigated ten aspects of mental illness in Bendel State (1) An increase of the prevalence of mental illness (psychiatric disorder) in Bendel State. (2) Unaided, unguided, and uncared for mentally ill people roaming about Bendel State. (3) Pluralistic Treatment Modalities for mentally ill patients in Bendel State. (4) Traditional Healers treating more mentally ill patients than the modern western psychiatric hospitals. (5) Inadequate modern western psychiatric facilities in Bendel State. (6) Controversy between Traditional Health and modern western trained doctors over the issue of possible cooperation between traditional and modern western medicine. (7) Evidence of mental illness in all ethnic groups in Bendel State. (8) More scientifically based and better organized modern western psychiatric hospitals than the traditional healing centers. (9) Traditional healers' level of approach with patients, and accessibility to patients' families compared with the modern western trained doctors. (10) An urgent need for an official action to institute a comprehensive mental health policy that will provide an optimum care for the mentally ill in Bendel State, and in Nigeria in general.^ Of the eight popular treatment modalities generally used in Bendel State for mental illness, 54% of the non-patient population sampled preferred the use of traditional healing, 26.5% preferred the use of modern western treatment, and 19.5% preferred religious healers.^ The investigator concluded at this time not to recommend the integration of Traditional Healing and modern western medicine in Nigeria. Rather, improvement of the existing modern western psychiatric facilities and a proposal to establish facilities to enable traditional healing and modern western medicine to exist side by side were highly recommended. ^

Understanding mental illness in Nigeria: Bringing culture and traditional medicine into mental health policy

One of the major challenges in treating mental illness in Nigeria is that the health care facilities and mental health care professionals are not enough in number or well equipped to handle the burden of mental illness. There are several barriers to treatment for individual Nigerians which include the following: such as the lack of understanding of the root causes of mental illness, lack of financial support to get mental treatment, lack of social support (family, friends, neighbors), the fear of stigmatization concerning being labeled as mentally ill or being in association with the mentally ill, and the consultation of traditional native healers who may be unknowingly prolonging illness, rather than addressing and treating them due to lack of formal education and standardization of their treatments. Another barrier is the non-health nature of the mental health services in Nigeria. Traditional healers are essentially the mental health system. The elderly, women, and children are the most vulnerable groups in times of strife and hardships. Their mental well-being must be taken into account as well as their special needs in times of personal or societal crisis. ^ Nigerian mental health policy is geared toward forming a mental health system, but in actuality only a mental illness care system is the observed result of the policy. The government of Nigeria has drafted a mental health policy, yet its actual implementation into the Nigerian health infrastructure and society waits to be materialized. The limited health legislation or policy implementations tend to favor those who have access to these urban areas and the facilities' health services. Nigerians living in rural areas are at a disadvantage; many of them may not even be aware of services available to help them understand and treat mental illness. Perhaps, government driven health interventions geared toward mental illness in rural areas would reach an underserved Nigerians and Africans in general. Issues with political instability and limited infrastructure often hinder crucial financial resources and legislation from reaching the people that are truly in need of governmental leadership in regards to mental health policy.^ Traditional healers are a severely untapped resource in the treatment of mental illness within the Nigerian population. They are abundant within Nigerian communities and are meeting a real need for the mentally ill. However, much can be done to remove the barriers that prevent the integration of traditional healers within the mental health system and improve the quality of care they administer within the population. Mental illness is almost exclusively coped with through traditional medicine practices. Mobilization and education from each strata of Nigerian society and government as well as input from the medical community can improve how traditional medicine is utilized as a treatment for clinical illness and help alleviate the heavy burden of mental illness in Nigeria. Currently, there is no existing policy making structure for a working mental health system in Nigeria, and traditional healers are not taken into account in any formulation of mental health policy. Advocacy for mental illness is severely inadequate due to fear of stigmatization, with no formally recognized national of regional mental health association.^