No abstract

While two editorials have raised concerns about the decline in Australian academic psychiatry, for a genuine rejuvenation to ever occur, we will need to re-examine how women can be better included in this important endeavour. While attainment of fellowship has reached gender parity, academic psychiatry has disappointingly lagged, with 80% of its senior leadership roles across Australia and New Zealand still held by men, with a similar situation in the United Kingdom and the United States as well as many other countries. Encouraging women into academic psychiatry is not only critical to progress as a profession but also will help address the current blindness to sex differences in biological psychiatry, as well the social impact of restrictive gender norms and the effects of gender-based violence on mental health. This potentially creates opportunities for significant gains and insights into mental disorders. However, addressing the barriers for women in academia requires tackling the entrenched disparities across salaries, grant funding, publications, teaching responsibilities, keynote invitations and academic promotions alongside the gender-based microaggressions, harassment and tokenism reported by many of our female academics. Many women must grapple with not just a ‘second shift’ but a ‘third shift’, making the burden of an academic career unreasonable and burnout more likely. Addressing this is no easy task. The varied research in academic medicine reveals no quick fixes, although promoting gender equity brings significant potential benefits. Areas such as academic psychiatry need to recognise our community’s growing discomfort with workplaces that choose to maintain status quo. Gender equity must be a critical part of any quest to revive this important area of practice for our profession.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) coordinators (ASDCs) on key aspects of the experience of obtaining an ASD diagnosis and post-diagnostic supports in New Zealand. Method: Members of New Zealand ASD parent support groups were surveyed. Results: Of 516 parents, 41.3% had seen an ASDC. The majority were satisfied. Parents who saw ASDCs pre-diagnosis were more likely to be satisfied with the diagnostic process ( p = .04) and saw fewer professionals before receiving a diagnosis ( p = .04). Parents who had seen ASDCs post-diagnosis were more likely to be satisfied with post-diagnostic supports ( p < .001) and their coordination ( p < .001). Conclusions: ASDCs are well regarded by parents and improve key aspects of the process of obtaining an ASD diagnosis and post-diagnostic supports. Given the particularly low rates of parent satisfaction with post-diagnostic supports (23%) and their coordination (19%), ASDCs may be of most value when employed post-diagnosis to assist parents in navigating key supports and co-developing comprehensive individualised care plans.