Mental health and well-being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia during COVID-19.

In May 2020, an independent working party was convened to determine the mental health and well-being needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia, in response to COVID-19. Thirty Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and allies worked together in a two-month virtual collaboration process. Here, we provide the working party's five key recommendations and highlight the evidence supporting these proposals. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander self-determination and governance must be prioritised to manage the COVID-19 recovery in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. To mitigate long-term social and economic impacts of COVID-19 to Australian society, the historical underinvestment in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples must be reconciled. Equitable, needs-based funding is required to support strengths-based, place-based initiatives that address the determinants of health. This includes workforce and infrastructure development and effective evaluation. There is a clear, informed pathway to health and healing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples being enacted by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership and community organisations; it remains to be seen how these recommendations will be implemented.

INTRODUCTION

Important lessons can be learned by examining the efficacy of responses to COVID‐19 across the globe. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have emerged as a group that have been protected and empowered against the immediate public health threat of COVID‐19, with not a single death being reported in the first year of the pandemic. This is despite historical and contemporary evidence that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are disproportionately affected by pandemics (Dudgeon et al., 2014). Still, it is critical to remain vigilant in responding to the virus and pandemic, particularly as the mental health and well‐being impacts of the pandemic come to a fore. In May 2020, a working party of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and allies were convened to determine the specific mental health and well‐being needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia. The final report A National COVID‐19 Pandemic Issues Paper on Mental Health and Wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020) considered both the shorter‐term crisis responses and the longer‐term recovery responses. This paper presents an overview of the precursors, consultation process, and the five key recommendations and actions outlined in the final report, as well as the evidence supporting these insights. These recommendations align with the general consensus across the globe that Indigenous self‐determination is critical for healing and improving/maintaining optimal health and well‐being. This is as true during a pandemic, as at any other time.

COVID‐19 is a respiratory illness and a novel form of coronavirus (Australian Government Department of Health, 2020b). The COVID‐19 outbreak was first reported in December 2019 and was declared a global emergency by the World Health Organisation in January 2020, arriving in Australia later that month (Australian Government Department of Health, 2020b; Schumaker, 2020). In partnership with the Australian government, Aboriginal community‐controlled health organisations (ACCHOs) and their respective peak organisations in the service sector were the first to mobilise to respond to the public health issue presented by COVID‐19 (see: Crooks et al., 2020). Biosecurity measures were imposed to prevent the spread of the virus, particularly travel restrictions from overseas travellers to Australia. On March 23, the Government introduced lockdown measures to further stop the spread of the virus (Australian Government Department of Health, 2020a; Parliament of Australia, 2020).

In March 2020, an academic Taskforce of over 100 leading research experts was convened to provide further advice to the government on evidence‐based public health strategies, including the care of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Group of Eight Australia, 2020). This led to the development of the COVID‐19 Roadmap to Recovery report (see: Group of Eight Australia, 2020). The report called for immediate government action to control the spread of COVID‐19, including early detection, isolation, travel restrictions and border controls, as well as the importance of public trust and civic engagement (Group of Eight Australia, 2020). Key recommendations for the longer‐term implementation of recovery from COVID‐19 focused on: the healthcare system and workers, preparing to relax controls, mental health and well‐being, equity of access, clarity of communication and, critically, the care of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Group of Eight Australia, 2020).

Evidence from previous pandemics indicates that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples experience significantly poorer health outcomes during a pandemic compared to non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Crooks et al., 2020; Flint et al., 2010). For example, during the 2009 H1N1 influenza, rates of the virus, hospitalisations and intensive care admissions were five, eight, and three times, respectively, higher among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, relative to the non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander population (Crooks et al., 2020; Flint et al., 2010). Globally, Indigenous peoples experience greater rates of infections and deaths during pandemics due to social, cultural, political, and historical determinants of health, in addition to a lack of control and self‐determination over public health responses in their communities (Power et al., 2020). Historical and political determinants of health acknowledge that as a result of colonisation, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have experienced centuries of dispossession, marginalisation and oppressive government legislations that impact the health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon et al., 2014; Sherwood, 2013). Cultural determinants of health include systemic and institutional racism, and discrimination that maintain racial inequity in Australian society. Subsequent social determinants of health, such as poverty, overcrowded housing and homelessness, food and water insecurity, barriers to healthcare and education, and unemployment, further contribute to the social, economic, and health disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in contemporary Australia (Australian Government Australian Institute of Health & Welfare, 2016, 2020b; Sherwood, 2013; Zubrick et al., 2014).

Chapter 9 of the Roadmap to Recovery report focused on the care of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia during COVID‐19. Here, the largely Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander academic Taskforce reiterated the need for evidence‐based and culturally safe responses to protect the public health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples during the pandemic and recovery. In February 2020, the National Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation (NACCHO), peak organisations, and member services had already led specific, efficient, and effective initiatives to prepare and protect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities during the pandemic. To support these efforts, four key public health recommendations were made (Group of Eight Australia, 2020; Moodie et al., 2020). The chapter emphasised that the public health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples requires policy development processes that are grounded in the human right of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to self‐determination. This includes supporting community‐controlled health organisations and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leadership. The recommendations also highlighted the serious and urgent need for adequate housing, accurate and transparent reporting during the pandemic, long‐term workforce support, and the allocation of needs‐based funding to support the care of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Group of Eight Australia, 2020).

The primary aim of the Roadmap to Recovery report was to provide rigorous and urgent evidence‐based advice during the early stage of the pandemic, and these had wide‐reaching implications for policy development and public health. The Taskforce outlined two fundamental strategic responses: elimination or suppression; rejecting herd immunity as a viable option for managing the COVID‐19 pandemic (Group of Eight Australia, 2020). An example of the early implementation of each of these responses in three countries is provided below. The effect of policy decisions on these countries’ Indigenous peoples is highlighted.

Elimination: In New Zealand, the speed and intensity of the government's approach of elimination has been unprecedented internationally, expediting social and economic recovery (Jefferies et al., 2020; Praveen, 2020). There have been 26 deaths in the overall population, at the time of writing (5 deaths per 1 M; Ministry of Health, 2021; Statista, 2021). Confirmed cases in Maori and Pacific peoples remain low (7.8% and 7.4%, respectively) and 6 Indigenous deaths recorded (Ministry of Health, 2021). The decisive response by government, in addition to high civic compliance, was successful in supressing community transmission which limited disease disparity for Indigenous populations (Jefferies et al., 2020).

Suppression: In Australia, the government's approach to suppress the virus and relatively slower lockdown implementation, in addition to advantageous geography, has resulted in a moderate recovery of social and economic activity (ABC News, 2021). At the time of writing, there have been 910 deaths (36 deaths per 1 M; Statista, 2021), community transmission and confirmed cases in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples have remained low (0.5% of all confirmed cases) with no deaths recorded (Australian Government Department of Health, 2021; Government of Western Australia Department of Health, 2021).

Herd Immunity: In the United States of America, the government appeared to elect the herd immunity approach, which has resulted in severe social, cultural, political, and economic repercussions (ABC News, 2020). There have been 564,846 deaths at the time of writing (1,721 deaths per 1 M; Statista, 2021). Between January and June 2020, COVID‐19 cases and mortality rates have been significantly higher in American Indian and Alaska Native peoples compared to non‐Indigenous persons (3.5 times and 1.8 times, respectively; Arrazola et al., 2020).

These examples illustrate the significant consequences of government policy, and the disproportionate impact of pandemics on Indigenous peoples. They further demonstrate the short‐ and long‐term effects of policy recommendations and highlight the utility of evidence‐based advice and action.

Following the Roadmap to Recovery submission to government, a national Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander working party was convened by Professor Pat Dudgeon and facilitated by the University of Western Australia's Poche Centre for Indigenous Health. The working party investigated the specific issues regarding mental health and well‐being during and following the COVID‐19 pandemic for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The two‐month online collaboration and consultation process is presented below, followed by key recommendations made by the working party in the National COVID‐19 Pandemic Issues Paper on Mental Health and Wellbeing For Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Evidence of the efficacy for these foundational recommendations is emphasised.

COLLABORATION PROCESS

The working party (N = 30) included Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander academics and well‐being experts, as well as Aboriginal Elders, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health professionals, leaders and representatives from ACCHOs across Australia, and allies. Together, the working party participated in an iterative and collaborative process, to establish the key recommendations detailed below. The collaboration process was guided by nine principles drawn from the National Strategic Framework for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Mental Health and Social and Emotional Wellbeing 2004–2009/2017–2023 (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, 2017; Social Health Reference Group, 2004) and the Ways Forward report (Swan & Raphael, 1995). The nine principles were operationalised through open and regular discussion, sharing resources, drafting reports, and exchanging feedback. In line with principles of Indigenous governance and self‐determination, the working party was Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‐led and was comprised of strong Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representation from diverse areas and occupations. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ voices and the experiences of service providers working with communities during COVID‐19 were prioritised.

The key recommendations were developed over the course of six, weekly virtual roundtable sessions between April and June 2020, facilitated by Zoom video‐conferencing. Each roundtable session varied in length from 1 to 3 hours and utilised focused yarning methods to develop the recommendations (Bessarab & Ng'andu, 2010). Focused yarning methods are a recognised qualitative technique that (1) provide a culturally appropriate platform to champion and draw on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledge systems; (2) grow partnerships between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander researchers, service providers, and mental health experts; and (3) establish culturally safe recommendations to meet community needs (Walker et al., 2014). The first roundtable session began with an Acknowledgment of Country and introductions by each attendee, led by the facilitator. This was followed by a brief social yarn. Social yarning is a core component of focused research topic yarning employed as an unstructured process to orient and connect participants to each other and to individual experiences and priorities that will shape the topic of discussion (Bessarab & Ng'andu, 2010). Research topic yarning was then employed to generate focused discussion regarding COVID‐19 priorities in relation to (1) the national and state organisations represented, (2) the local communities’ experiences and needs, and (3) individual concerns based on that participant's expertise. Research topic yarning comprises a semi‐structured discussion. This discussion is led by the facilitator to ensure all voices and perspectives are heard and to generate conversation and explore major themes arising from the discussion (Bessarab & Ng'andu, 2010).

In subsequent roundtable sessions, members of the working party discussed previous meeting items, and new emerging priorities and needs relating to COVID‐19 and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health and well‐being. At the end of each roundtable session, the main messages from the focused yarning were summarised and agreed upon by all members of the working party. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and community voices were prioritised throughout the sessions, although all attendees contributed to sharing information and providing feedback. The facilitator was responsible for ensuring the topic discussions remained on track across sessions. Although no conflicts arose throughout the roundtable sessions, the facilitator encouraged members to identify and discuss potential conflicts early, so these could be addressed and resolved promptly. Development of, and consensus on, the key recommendations was formed by all members of the working party. The key recommendations were then written in a report document (A National COVID‐19 Pandemic Issues Paper on Mental Health and Wellbeing for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples) and underwent an iterative and collaborative feedback process. Final approval from each of the working party members was sought prior to publication.

The strong engagement and participation between researchers and community partners in the current work enabled the collection of detailed information regarding the experiences and needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples during COVID‐19. The reciprocal collaboration process is a testament to the importance of community partnerships.

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE COVID‐19 MENTAL HEALTH RECOVERY WITH ABORIGINAL AND TORRES STRAIT ISLANDER PEOPLES AND COMMUNITIES

The Right to Self‐determination

The first and central recommendation developed by the working party was that self‐determination must be the guiding principle of all planning and responding to COVID‐19 that impacts the mental health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

Self‐determination as a human right states, in part, that Indigenous peoples have the right to “…freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development” (United Nations, 2007), including as decision makers in mainstream mental health services (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020; United Nations, 2007). The failure of British and Australian governments to recognise and uphold this human right in Australia is at the heart of the current health disadvantage experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Australia Human Rights Commission, 2013). Worldwide, self‐determination is recognised as best practice in supporting mental health and well‐being in Indigenous communities (Chandler & Lalonde, 1998, 2008; Dudgeon, Milroy, et al., 2016).

In the context of COVID‐19, the core recommendation developed by the working party was that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and community organisations must continue to be heard and then supported to lead the pandemic crisis and recovery responses for their peoples and communities. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples also have the right to be closely involved in pandemic management and decision making that impacts the whole Australian population, inclusive of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). For example, in response to the pandemic, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander COVID‐19 Advisory Group was swiftly formed to work alongside Government. This Advisory Group was co‐chaired by NACCHO and the Commonwealth Department of Health, and represented by state, territory, and regional peak Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations (Moodie et al., 2020). The Advisory Group was decisive and effective in their COVID‐19 public health responses, which have been recognised across the globe (Eades et al., 2020). Sustained support is required to ensure the continuity of this essential Advisory Group.

The working party developed several key actions related to the right to self‐determination. Firstly, the working party advised the establishment of a National Indigenous COVID‐19 Social and Emotional Wellbeing (SEWB) Consortium to lead Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health and well‐being policy responses and ensure consistency between national and local planning (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). SEWB is a term that describes Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ holistic model of health and mental health. SEWB considers the individual, as well as their connections to family and community, and further includes connections to culture, land and spirituality as parts of a whole‐of‐life view of well‐being. Finally, SEWB also acknowledges the role of social, cultural, and political determinants of well‐being (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, 2017; Gee et al., 2014; National Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Leadership in Mental Health, 2015). Secondly, the working party recommended that the Indigenous Evaluation Strategy (Australian Government Productivity Commission, 2020) be applied to the development and implementation of all legislation that impacts Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Facilitating strong Indigenous governance underpins self‐determination and provides a process through which it can flourish (Aboriginal Governance & Management Program, 2021; Martin, 2005; O'Malley, 1996). ACCHOs are purpose‐built and preferred by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to support self‐determination, local governance, and SEWB‐informed initiatives (Mazel, 2016; Panaretto et al., 2014), yet they are unable to do so without sufficient funding. As such, the third recommendation was for direct resourcing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander organisations and the ACCHO sector, to enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‐led initiatives that meet community needs. In turn, this would support ACCHOs to continue to lead, develop, and implement pandemic‐related recovery efforts (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

There is substantial local and global evidence supporting the efficacy of self‐determination on the health and well‐being outcomes of Indigenous peoples. For example, federal policies promoting self‐determination of American Indian and Alaskan Native peoples in the United States of America have been shown to reverse social, cultural, and economic determinants of health. This in turn led to demonstrated improvements in the provision of social services, economic growth, and healthcare (Cornell & Kalt, 2010). In Australia, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples lack constitutional recognition. Without an acknowledgement of Australia's First Peoples, self‐determination is restricted (The Uluru Statement, 2017). Despite this, the Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Services (ACCHSs) sector has been internationally recognised as an exemplary demonstration of the enactment of the right to self‐determination (Mazel, 2016). Compared to mainstream health services, ACCHSs have demonstrated equal and better delivery of healthcare for the prevention and management of chronic diseases. In addition, ACCHSs provide greater access to care, particularly in remote and rural areas, and are considerable employers of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia (Panaretto et al., 2014).

The laudable efforts of ACCHOs and ACCHSs, in partnership with Government, in providing culturally appropriate, evidence‐based prevention messages and strategies to protect Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples from COVID‐19, have resulted in low numbers of infection among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia, as compared to non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and Indigenous peoples worldwide (Finlay & Wenitong, 2020; Moodie et al., 2020). It is evident then that when self‐determination is facilitated and encouraged, health and well‐being outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities and peoples are improved.

The Health and Mental Health Workforce

The second recommendation of the working party involved a call for the establishment and support for culturally responsive mental health and well‐being services and workforce, supported by needs‐based funding (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

Inadequate access to culturally safe and appropriate services has been a long‐standing barrier to improving the mental health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, in regard to both service uptake and treatment efficacy (Davidson, 2014; Isaacs et al., 2010; Prentice et al., 2017). Mainstream mental health services lack Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander representation in the workforce and are often not culturally safe or responsive (Davidson, 2014; Larkin, 2006). Prior to COVID‐19, the prevalence of psychological distress was markedly disproportionate between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018, 2019). During COVID‐19, the demand on existing health and mental health services increased substantially due to stress associated with social restrictions, financial instability, border closures, and travel restrictions. This has put enormous pressure on staff and increases the risk of burnout (Fitts et al., 2020). Additionally, itinerant Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples who were residing in major cities were relocated to their home communities, where services that were already sparse and under‐resourced were experiencing staffing difficulties due to travel restrictions on fly‐in‐fly‐out and drive‐in‐drive‐out staff (Dudgeon, 2020; Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020; Indigenous Allied Health Australia, 2020).

The working party developed three key actions to facilitate appropriate and sufficient mental health services and workforce that meet the needs of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities. Firstly, it was recommended that immediate upskilling and training of staff be facilitated to utilise and develop the current workforce in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). This workforce development should be guided by the National Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health Workforce Strategic Framework 2016–2023 (Australian Health Ministers’ Advisory Council, 2017). Online training can support equitable remote education to strengthen the rural and remote SEWB workforce and address the shortage of services in these areas. Secondly, in the longer term there is a need to develop effective education, employment, and service models that build and entrench a long‐term, place‐based mental health and SEWB workforce. These models should be developed in alignment with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander governance frameworks (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Critically, the development of service capacity must be guided by national standards for cultural safety and responsiveness, particularly for the non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander workforce. In addition, formal recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander knowledges and skills, including cultural healing, must be considered (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

There is emerging evidence that emergency fast‐tracked training and upskilling is effective in meeting the workforce needs during pandemics, while simultaneously increasing the confidence of workers in technical and non‐technical skills (Almomani et al., 2020; Bourgeault et al., 2020; Wise et al., 2020). During COVID‐19, many countries had nursing and medical students fast‐tracked to enter the workforce earlier to meet workforce demands (Ford, 2021; Kottasova, 2020; The University of Queensland, 2020). The practicality of swift upskilling and training to develop and utilise the local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander and non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander mental health workforce is critical. However, it is important that this is not done at the expense of cultural responsiveness.

Within Australia's healthcare system, there are significant differences among cultural groups, with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples less likely than non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to receive needed services (Gwynne et al., 2019). Research has suggested that bias, prejudice, racism, and stereotyping by healthcare providers contribute to these differences in healthcare and increase psychological distress, which further exacerbate the need for mental healthcare (Awofeso, 2011; Berger & Sarnyai, 2015; Cunningham et al., 2005; Durey & Thompson, 2012; Institute of Medicine, 2002). The development of culturally responsive mental health services and workforce, facilitated through targeted and supportive education and training, is integral to the provision of equitable and effective healthcare with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon, Darlaston‐Jones, et al., 2016; Dudgeon, Harris, et al., 2016; Lai et al., 2018; Sabbioni et al., 2018). Importantly, traditional healers and Elders make an important contribution to the health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and provide holistic, culturally safe care that can address psychological and emotional distress (Dudgeon & Bray, 2018; Gone, 2013). Therefore, traditional healers should be recognised within mainstream mental health services. It is integral that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people's preference for holistic healing is acknowledged (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, 2017).

Social and Cultural Determinants of Health

The third recommendation of the working party was to adequately address risk factors associated with social determinants of health and promote protective factors of health, particularly cultural determinants (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

The causes of poor health and mental health among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples differ from non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health disadvantage and have their antecedents in the context of colonisation (King et al., 2009; Nettleton et al., 2007). Social, political, and cultural determinants of health contribute to the health and mental health gap between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people (Australian Government Australian Institute of Health & Welfare, 2020a; Marmot et al., 2008). During the COVID‐19 crisis, social determinants that negatively impact mental health were exacerbated, such as racism, lack of access to services, overcrowded housing and food, water and energy insecurity. Controlled isolation was utilised to manage the immediate threat and spread of the virus (i.e. the Australia‐wide lockdown that occurred in March 2020 and subsequent lockdown measures across the nation; BBC News, 2020). Although necessary to mitigate the public health risk, the indirect psychological effects of isolation include the following: increased rates of family violence, substance use, depression, self‐harm, eating disorders, and other mental health concerns (Power et al., 2020; The Guardian, 2020). Concurrently, cultural determinants that can improve mental health and increase resilience for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples were restricted, such as trips out onto Country and other cultural activities (Gee et al., 2014; People Culture Environment, 2014).

The working party recommended that access to basic needs be guaranteed for all, prioritising those living in disaster affected areas (i.e. the bushfires areas of January 2020). The working party emphasised the structural importance of job creation and continuity, as well as service and infrastructure development, particularly housing, to address needs and build ongoing community capacity (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Secondly, tailored mental health and well‐being responses are critically needed for particular groups, including the elderly, youth, women's and men's groups, LGBTQI + SB, individuals with disabilities, and survivors of family violence, child abuse, incarceration or homelessness (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Thirdly, the working party also emphasised the importance of protective cultural determinants of mental health and well‐being. It is critical that the National Indigenous COVID‐19 SEWB Consortium (recommendation 1) examine the impact of the pandemic on the well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples to inform the re‐engagement in protective cultural determinants (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). The working party emphasised the importance of local initiatives and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‐specific online community events that enabled community contact in the first year of the pandemic. To facilitate the recovery and empowerment of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities in the long term, implementation of strengths‐based, cultural SEWB programmes must be prioritised.

Cultural practises are integral to facilitating the health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Bourke et al., 2018; Gee et al., 2014). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander culture and society are defined by relationality and collectivism; cultural activities enable stronger connections to family, community, land and spirituality (Dudgeon et al., 2010; Fejo‐King, 2013; Sutherland & Adams, 2019). Further, these connections act as a buffer for psychological distress and intergenerational trauma (Atkinson et al., 2014). Addressing cultural determinants using strengths‐based and holistic models of health that centre Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander ways of knowing, being, and doing can help to build individual and collective identities and improve the mental health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Auger, 2016; Parker & Milroy, 2014; Schill et al., 2019; Zubrick et al., 2014).

Digital and Telehealth Inclusion with Immediate Attention to an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Helpline

The fourth recommendation of the working party regarded providing equitable and sustainable digital infrastructure and telehealth services to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities across Australia (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

COVID‐19 has presented a unique opportunity to develop innovative models of tele and digital mental health (eMH) care for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples that are equitable, sustainable, culturally safe, and effective (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Yet, this opportunity is not without risk. A particular concern of the working party regarding eMH is the issue of access. Structural inequity in the health system is a barrier to access and uptake of health and mental healthcare for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Davidson, 2014; Institute of Medicine, 2002; Prentice et al., 2017). Additionally, many rural and remote communities lack the basic infrastructure to support the integration of eMH. Digital exclusion may therefore exacerbate structural inequity, particularly in rural and remote regions (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). It is critical that the rapid movement toward eMH service models include commitments that ensure that these models address, rather than exacerbate, current inequities, including access and cultural safety, to ensure stronger and improved models in the long‐term (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

The working party identified four key actions for engagement with eMH. Firstly, there is a clear need for an immediate and ongoing investment in an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‐specific helpline for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Dudgeon, Bray, et al., 2020). This should be supported by the development of vocational certificates and scholarships in telephone counselling skills for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health workers and non‐Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020). Secondly, technology capacity and infrastructure must be established or improved to ensure equitable Internet access in urban, rural, and remote Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities. Thirdly, evaluations that include both clinical and cultural efficacy in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities are imperative to ensure that eMH models are improving services. It is recommended that service providers work with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities in all stages of the development and implementation of eMH services to ensure their long‐term sustainability (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

EMH is a relatively new model of healthcare delivery. Emerging research evidence provides support for eMH models of service delivery with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (e.g., Caffery et al., 2017; Clair et al., 2019; Smith et al., 2012, 2019). A recent systematic review conducted by Caffery et al. (2017) examined the health outcomes associated with telehealth services delivered to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Their results indicated that telehealth services helped to improve access, screening rates, SEWB, and clinical outcomes (Caffery et al., 2017). Several studies have also demonstrated that the telehealth delivery of healthcare is associated with high levels of satisfaction among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander patients, their families, and healthcare workers. In addition, telehealth delivery is preferred to traditional in‐person delivery in rural regions, due to reduced costs, waiting times and travel, and facilitates the access of local supports (Clair et al., 2019; Mooi et al., 2012). Still, less is known about the impact of digital services on mental health outcomes. Therefore, optimism is contingent on the adoption of best practice, including Indigenous governance and culturally safe services that accommodate models of cultural healing and holistic well‐being.

Evaluation that Upholds Indigenous Data Sovereignty

The fifth recommendation of the working party involved building a comprehensive COVID‐19 database and evaluation plan that upholds Indigenous data sovereignty (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

Data sovereignty is an expression of the right to self‐determination and must be secured (Kukutai & Taylor, 2016; Lovett et al., 2019). Several key actions were emphasised by the working party to facilitate this process. The first is that services providers and funding bodies must be accountable for their role in facilitating the health and well‐being outcomes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. Strong evaluation that considers both clinical and cultural efficacy is needed to ensure accountability. Secondly, barriers around data quality and timely data sharing about Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander clients must be addressed to facilitate the establishment of a COVID‐19 evidence base. Thirdly, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander‐led, community‐based research must be supported to evaluate the impact of COVID‐19 among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and communities, including both encouraging and difficult experiences (Dudgeon, Derry, et al., 2020).

Data regarding the rates and impact of COVID‐19 on Indigenous peoples globally are lacking (Power et al., 2020). Obtaining these data is vital in assessing the impact of the pandemic on Indigenous peoples. These data are also critical to providing a rationale for the allocation of needs‐based funding of resources and the implementation of culturally responsive services (Power et al., 2020). National data storage and access must respect and adhere to principles of Indigenous data sovereignty. These principles include: (1) establishing Indigenous data governance whereby data relating to Indigenous peoples are held and controlled by Indigenous peoples; (2) ensuring that collection of data supports the collective benefit of Indigenous peoples to innovate, increase engagement between governance and peoples, and ensure positive outcomes; (3) upholding responsibilities to facilitate respectful relationships with Indigenous peoples and communities from whom the data comprise; and (4) consideration of the ethics of the data collected (Carroll et al., 2020). The collective move toward Indigenous data sovereignty will facilitate equitable participation, empower self‐determination, and promote engagement between ACCHOs and other healthcare service providers, leading to more equitable mental health and well‐being outcomes for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Carroll et al., 2020).

SUMMARY

The COVID‐19 pandemic has triggered tremendous social, cultural, economic, and political disruptions globally; these are expected to leave a lasting imprint on mental health and well‐being for years to come. Historically, and as evidenced in other parts of the world now, pandemics have disproportionately affected Indigenous peoples, who already face significant health disparities and systemic disadvantage. Equitable, needs‐based funding is imperative to address these inequities. The longer‐term consequences of the pandemic on the mental health and well‐being of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples require the continued support of, and partnership with, ACCHOs by Government and policymakers.

A framework of recommendations that was collaboratively decided and endorsed by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders across Australia during the first wave of the pandemic is presented here. The core recommendations emphasise Indigenous self‐determination as the guiding principle for the development and implementation of pandemic‐related legislation, and the provision of services and workforce. Further, the recommendations call for immediate action to address the social and cultural determinants of health and SEWB, build the mental health workforce, establish eMH infrastructure, and ensure comprehensive evaluations of pandemic responses uphold Indigenous data sovereignty principles. Since the working party developed these recommendations, COVID‐19 continues to impact Australia. For example, Melbourne and Sydney had experienced a second wave of virus transmission at the time of writing (BBC News, 2020; Noble & Oliveri, 2020). The distribution of COVID‐19 vaccinations in Australia is now in motion, yet the full impact of the pandemic on mental health and well‐being is yet to be realised (Power et al., 2020; Savage, 2020).

The COVID‐19 pandemic and the Black Lives Matter protests in Australia and across the globe have culminated in a call to governments across the world to address racial inequality, social determinants of health, and health disparities that are exacerbated by pandemics such as COVID‐19. This is in line with the Australian Government's long‐standing commitment to close the health gap and achieve equality for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples (Commonwealth of Australia Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet, 2020). Over the last year, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander leaders and organisations have demonstrated that there is the capacity and capability in the community‐controlled sector to respond to crisis and disaster, efficiently and effectively. These responses represent the strongest evidence to date that the most effective strategy for the health of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples is the full expression of Indigenous self‐determination.

CONFLICT OF INTERESTS

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.