Ramsay Health Care, Australia's largest private hospital company, announced plans to close 17 of its 20 psychology clinics across the country within a few months. The closures were communicated to staff earlier in July 2025. The remaining clinics will be located in Charlestown (NSW), Joondalup (WA), and Cairns (QLD).

The company stated that this decision is part of a broader strategy to enhance the delivery of mental health services through various settings, including hospital and telehealth options. While community-based psychology clinics are shutting down, Ramsay will continue its inpatient and day programs at hospitals.

This move has raised concerns among mental health advocates, including Federal Greens leader Larissa Waters, who highlighted that many Australians already struggle to access necessary mental health support due to long waiting lists. She criticized the profit-driven nature of healthcare decisions that could further limit access for those in need.

Ramsay Health Care's financial performance showed significant profits recently, largely from selling its stake in overseas operations. However, the company's share price has fallen by 16% over the past year. As these clinic closures proceed until late August, there are worries about where patients will find care amidst an already strained system for mental health services in Australia.

Original article

Here is an analysis of the article's value to a regular person:

Actionable Information: The article does not provide any immediate steps or instructions for readers to take. It informs about Ramsay Health Care's decision to close psychology clinics but offers no alternatives or resources for those affected. There is no clear guidance on where patients can seek mental health support after the closures.

Educational Depth: While the article shares important facts about the clinic closures and their potential impact, it does not delve deeply into the reasons behind the decision. It mentions the company's broader strategy but does not explain the specific benefits or drawbacks of this strategy. The article could have provided more context and analysis to help readers understand the situation better.

Personal Relevance: The topic of mental health clinic closures is highly relevant to anyone who relies on these services or knows someone who does. It directly affects access to mental health support, which is a critical issue for many Australians. The article highlights the concerns of mental health advocates and politicians, emphasizing the potential impact on those already struggling with long waiting lists.

Public Service Function: The article serves a public service by bringing attention to a decision that could significantly impact mental health services in Australia. It quotes a Federal Greens leader, Larissa Waters, who raises valid concerns about the profit-driven nature of healthcare decisions and their potential to limit access to necessary support. However, it does not provide any official warnings, emergency contacts, or tools that readers can use to navigate this change.

Practicality of Advice: As the article does not offer any advice or steps, it is difficult to assess the practicality of its content. It primarily informs readers about the closures and the potential consequences, leaving them without clear guidance on how to navigate this change.

Long-Term Impact: The article hints at long-term implications, suggesting that the clinic closures could further strain an already challenged mental health system. It implies that the decision may limit access to mental health support for those in need, potentially impacting their long-term well-being. However, it does not provide any solutions or strategies to mitigate these long-term effects.

Emotional or Psychological Impact: The article may evoke emotions such as concern, frustration, or even anger in readers who rely on these services or advocate for better mental health support. It highlights the potential negative impact on those already struggling, which could leave readers feeling helpless or anxious. However, it does not offer any strategies or resources to help readers cope with these emotions or take constructive action.

Clickbait or Ad-Driven Words: The article does not appear to use sensational or exaggerated language to grab attention. It presents the information in a straightforward manner, focusing on the facts and potential implications of the clinic closures.

In summary, while the article provides valuable information about Ramsay Health Care's decision and its potential impact, it falls short in offering actionable steps, in-depth analysis, or practical advice. It serves as an important alert about a critical issue but leaves readers without clear guidance on how to navigate this change or improve their situation.

The proposed closure of Ramsay Health Care's psychology clinics, while framed as a strategic shift, reveals a disturbing disregard for the moral bonds that sustain families and communities. This decision, driven by profit, threatens to sever the very fabric that holds society together.

The closure of these clinics, especially in an era of long waiting lists for mental health support, will undoubtedly leave many Australians without the care they desperately need. This is a betrayal of trust, as the company prioritizes financial gains over the welfare of the vulnerable.

By removing access to community-based psychology services, Ramsay Health Care is effectively pushing families to rely on hospital-based care or telehealth, options that may not be as accessible or effective for all. This shift could potentially burden parents and caregivers, forcing them to navigate complex systems and potentially compromising their ability to provide adequate care for their children and elders.

The impact of this decision extends beyond the immediate loss of services. It erodes the sense of community responsibility and solidarity, shifting the burden of care onto individuals and families, many of whom are already struggling. This move could further exacerbate social isolation and mental health challenges, especially for those without strong support networks.

The company's actions also raise concerns about the defense of the vulnerable. By closing these clinics, Ramsay Health Care is essentially abandoning its responsibility to support those in need, especially in communities where these clinics are the primary source of mental health care. This abandonment of duty could have devastating consequences for the most vulnerable members of society, including children and the elderly.

To restore trust and uphold their moral duty, Ramsay Health Care must reconsider their decision and find ways to maintain these essential community services. They should prioritize the well-being of their patients over profits and ensure that mental health support remains accessible and responsive to community needs.

If this behavior spreads unchecked, it will further erode the social fabric, leading to a society where the bonds of kinship and community are weakened, and where the most vulnerable are left to fend for themselves. This is a path towards social fragmentation and the breakdown of the very foundations that have sustained human life and communities for generations.

"The company stated that this decision is part of a broader strategy to enhance the delivery of mental health services through various settings, including hospital and telehealth options."

This sentence uses a virtue-signaling tactic. The company claims their decision is for the greater good, but it raises concerns as it may limit access to mental health support. The use of "enhance" and "strategy" makes the closure sound positive, hiding the potential negative impact.

"Ramsay Health Care's financial performance showed significant profits recently, largely from selling its stake in overseas operations."

Here, the focus on profits and financial gains suggests a money-driven motive. It implies that the company's decisions are influenced by financial interests, potentially prioritizing profits over patient care.

"While community-based psychology clinics are shutting down, Ramsay will continue its inpatient and day programs at hospitals."

By mentioning only the continuation of certain programs, this sentence creates a false sense of balance. It implies that the company is still providing adequate mental health services, ignoring the potential gap left by clinic closures.

"She criticized the profit-driven nature of healthcare decisions that could further limit access for those in need."

Larissa Waters' criticism highlights a political bias. She implies that profit motives are driving healthcare decisions, suggesting a negative impact on access to care. This statement takes a clear stance against profit-oriented healthcare.

"The closures were communicated to staff earlier in July 2025."

This passive voice construction hides the actor responsible for the closures. It downplays the role of the company, making it seem like an impersonal decision rather than an action taken by Ramsay Health Care.

The text evokes a range of emotions, primarily centered around concern and criticism of Ramsay Health Care's decision to close most of its psychology clinics.

Concern is expressed through words like "struggle," "long waiting lists," and "strained system," which describe the current state of mental health support in Australia. This emotion is further emphasized by the mention of Ramsay's profit-driven motives, which critics argue will limit access to care for those in need. The strength of this concern is heightened by the specific mention of Federal Greens leader Larissa Waters, who adds a political dimension to the issue, suggesting that the decision is not just a business move but one that has broader societal implications.

Anger is another emotion that surfaces, particularly in the criticism of profit-driven healthcare decisions. The text implies that the company's focus on financial gains is at odds with the public's need for accessible mental health services. This anger is likely intended to rally support against the clinic closures, encouraging readers to question the ethics of such decisions and potentially take action to oppose them.

Fear is also present, especially in the worry about where patients will find care after the closures. The text paints a picture of an already overburdened mental health system, and the potential loss of these clinics adds to the sense of uncertainty and anxiety about the future of mental health support in Australia.

These emotions work together to guide the reader's reaction by creating a sense of urgency and importance around the issue. By evoking concern, anger, and fear, the text aims to engage the reader's empathy and encourage them to see the closures as a significant problem that requires attention and potentially action.

The writer employs several persuasive techniques to enhance the emotional impact of the message. One notable strategy is the use of specific, vivid language to describe the potential consequences of the clinic closures. For instance, the mention of "long waiting lists" and a "strained system" paints a stark picture of the challenges already faced by those seeking mental health support. This language is designed to resonate with readers and make the issue feel more immediate and personal.

Additionally, the inclusion of a political figure, Larissa Waters, adds credibility and a sense of authority to the criticism. By associating the issue with a well-known advocate for mental health, the writer aims to lend weight to the concerns expressed and potentially inspire readers to take a similar stance.

The repetition of the word "profit" also serves to emphasize the perceived greed of the company, further fueling the anger and concern expressed in the text. By focusing on this aspect, the writer seeks to shift the reader's opinion of Ramsay Health Care, portraying them as more interested in financial gain than the well-being of their patients.

Overall, the emotional language and persuasive techniques used in the text are carefully crafted to evoke a strong reaction from readers, encouraging them to view the clinic closures as a serious issue that warrants attention and potentially action.