1 APPEARING BEFORE THE MENTAL HEALTH TRIBUNAL. 2 Index The Provisions of the Act relating to Tribunal hearings3 – 6 What is Evidence 7 Section 24 Continuing.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Confidentiality, Consent and Data Protection Elizabeth M Robertson Deputy Medical Director Grampian University Hospitals Trust.
Advertisements

Discussion topics Dr Layth Delaimy. Assessing suicide risk Why do we assess? How could we intervene? Should we prevent suicide? Ethical Dilemmas.
Trumbull County Probate Court
2005. Why is it necessary When person lacks capacity physicians have power and influence over them which could be abused 30% pts on acute medical wards.
The Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Implications for Commissioners and Care Providers Bruce Bradshaw Patient Experience Manager.
THE DEPRIVATION OF LIBERTY SAFEGUARDS
The right to a fair hearing before the Mental Health Review Board – what it means and how to ensure it Catherine Leslie Lawyer / Pro Bono Coordinator Mental.
Care and support planning Care Act Outline of content  Introduction Introduction  Production of the plan Production of the plan  Planning for.
The Least Restrictive Alternative – is it too Restrictive?
How to Find Your Way Around
Carers Strategy Joint initiative with Caerphilly CBC and will soon be subject to a consultation process prior to formal approval.
Session 1: Overview of the Guidelines and Comorbidity
302 Involuntary Commitment
Working together for quality mental health services General Practitioners Perspective Mental Health Act 2001.
Outpatient Services Programs Workgroup: Laura’s Law May 29, 2014.
Chelmsford Medical Centre.  Since the introduction of the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, there has been more clarity around.
Assessment The registered medical practitioner (RMP) employed by an approved mental health service or the ‘mental health practitioner’ (MHP) assesses the.
Responsible Clinician and Approved Clinician Roles
Dr Ruth Yates GP ST2 in Psychiatry. Aims and Objectives To learn about the Mental Health Act 1983 and different sections of it To learn how to detain.
Informed Consent in Mental Health. Context Relevant Legislation The Process of Informed Consent.
Salome Heyward & Associates Conference Services Addressing Graduate Students Accommodation Issues April , 2014 Presented by Salome Heyward, JD Addressing.
PILOT INVOLUNTARY TREATMENT PROGRAM Kevin Hedge Sydney West Area Health Service Centre for Addiction Medicine Nepean Hospital.
Restraint and deprivation of liberty: ethical considerations Anne Slowther.
Treatment for Mental Disorders and Protection of Patients’ Rights Mary Donnelly Law Faculty, University College Cork Centre for Criminal Justice and Human.
Solicitor Scottish Government Legal Division Section 193 and report writing.
1 CIVIL COMMITMENT CRITERIA Jane D. Hickey Office of the Attorney General June 4, 2008.
MENTAL HEALTH (AMENDMENT) ACT 2003 Given Royal Assent on 21 October Except for Part 2, the Act came into operation the day after it was given Royal.
Salome Heyward & Associates Conference Services The Role of Faculty In the Accommodation Process April , 2014 Presented by Salome Heyward, JD The.
THE MENTAL HEALTH ACT 2007 Implications for the medical treatment of patients in the community Richard Jones Consultant in Mental Health and Community.
Assessment & treatment Least restrictions on rights and dignity Support persons to make/participate in decisions Provide oversight & safeguard Role of.
Section 97(5) of the Act The National Commissioner must, after consultation with DG’s of Social Development, Justice, Education and Correctional Services,
The Mental Capacity Act 2005
Salome Heyward & Associates Conference Services Clinicals, Internships Special Admissions Programs April , 2014 Presented by Salome Heyward, JD.
Dr Mike Ewart Smith Division of Psychiatry, University of Witwatersrand The Ethics of Informed Consent: Revisiting the Doctor Patient Relationship.
Implementation of the Mental Health Act 2007 Section 12(2) Approved Doctors.
Mental Capacity Act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards Andrea Gray Mental Health Legislation Manager Welsh Government.
LEGAL STUDIES Unit 4 AOS2 Overview U4.AOS2. Unit 4 Area of Study 2 Unit 4 Area of Study 2 Court processes and procedures, and engaging in justice 1. Elements.
Jonathan Delman Transitions RTC University of Massachusetts Medical School 1.
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 No decisions about me without me.
Mental Health Policy, Human Rights & the Law Mental Disability Advocacy Program Open Society Institute Camilla Parker October 2004.
Quality in Practice (Winterbourne) Event 20/09/2013 Dignity in Dementia Care Denise J Mackey Derbyshire County Council Learning and Development Adult Care.
Mental Health An outline. Objectives of session Identify framework of mental health legislation Understand mental health act and code of practice Aware.
Discipline and Dismissals Lecture 12.  Must be fair.  RSA courts have decided that “Fairness” constitutes: 1.Substantive Fairness - Pertaining to reason;
Supervised Community Treatment Sue Browning –Social work team manager.
Mental Capacity Act 2005 Safeguarding Adults.
NMHDU (National Mental Health Development Unit) Supervised Community Treatment Where are we now? Malcolm King National MHA Project Lead National Mental.
A joint Australian, State and Territory Government Initiative Experiences and lessons from benchmarking Older Persons Mental Health Services Dr Rod McKay.
Consent & Vulnerable Adults Aim: To provide an opportunity for Primary Care Staff to explore issues related to consent & vulnerable adults.
Legal Aspects of Nursing Part 1
Section 5: Principles of Drug Addiction Treatment 1.
Westminster Homeless Health Co-ordination project 02/02/2016
Part III of the Act Patients involved in criminal proceedings or under sentence 1)NEW DEFINITION OF MENTAL DISORDER e.g. S36 Remand to hospital for treatment.
© Care Act 2014 Joanna Burton, Solicitor Clarke Willmott LLP T: E: W:
Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000, NSW The Occupational Health and Safety Act 2000 (the Act) is the main piece of legislation setting out a worker’s.
Patients and doctors making decisions together GMC Guidance 2008.
The Mental Health Act & Mental Capacity act Dr Faye Tarrant ST5 Substance Misuse.
Independent Examination June 4, 2008 Jill Milloy, Ph.D. Independent Examiner Fairfax-Falls Church CSB.
1. 2 Learning Outcomes Gain awareness and understanding of the definition of mental disorder contained within the MHA; Understand the criteria for detention.
Queensland Advocacy Incorporated Systems and Legal Advocacy for vulnerable people with Disability Reviews of ITOs Rebekah Leong QAILS Conference 18/03/14.
History and Basic Concepts of Mental Health and Mental Illness Assist. Professor Dr. Ali K. Al-Mesrawi.
Mark Hodgkinson Adult Protection and Review Officer Angus Council January 2014 Assessing Risk Mark Hodgkinson Adult Protection and Review Officer Angus.
Carer Perspectives Carers’ Journeys.
13ZA - Fit for purpose?.
Substance Addiction(Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 2017 Processes
Finding the “Rights” Balance
SAR Conference Presentation
Roles of the Mental Health Team:
Sections and Suicide Dr Layth Delaimy.
Assertive community treatment webinar
Disclaimer Opinions expressed in this presentation are those of the speaker and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Virginia Department for Aging.
Presentation transcript:

1 APPEARING BEFORE THE MENTAL HEALTH TRIBUNAL

2 Index The Provisions of the Act relating to Tribunal hearings3 – 6 What is Evidence 7 Section 24 Continuing Care Orders The Tribunal’s function in reviewing the Order9 What evidence is needed to satisfy the Tribunal of the s24 criteria How does the Tribunal determine the level of risk12 What evidence is needed of the least restrictive alternative15 – 16 Section 40 Community Treatment Orders17 – 23 The Tribunal’s function in reviewing the Order18 What evidence is needed to satisfy the Tribunal of the s40 criteria How does the Tribunal determine the level of risk12 What evidence is needed of the least restrictive alternative

3 Section A person may be detained as an involuntary patient in an approved hospital if – (a) the person appears to have a mental illness; and (a) the person appears to have a mental illness; and (b) there is, in consequence, a significant risk of harm to the person or others; and (b) there is, in consequence, a significant risk of harm to the person or others; and (c) the detention of the person as an involuntary patient is necessary to protect the person or others; and (c) the detention of the person as an involuntary patient is necessary to protect the person or others; and (d) the approved hospital is properly equipped and staffed for the care or treatment of the person (d) the approved hospital is properly equipped and staffed for the care or treatment of the person

4 Section A community treatment order may be made for the treatment of a person only if (a)The person has a mental illness; and (a)The person has a mental illness; and (b)There is, in consequence, a significant risk of harm to the person or others unless the mental illness is treated; and (b)There is, in consequence, a significant risk of harm to the person or others unless the mental illness is treated; and ( c)The order is necessary to ensure that the illness is properly treated; and ( c)The order is necessary to ensure that the illness is properly treated; and (d)Facilities or services are available for the care and treatment of the person (d)Facilities or services are available for the care and treatment of the person

5 Section 7 of the Act requires that: In exercising powers conferred by this Act in relation to an involuntary patient, the following principles must be observed: a) restrictions on the liberty of the patient and interference with the patient's rights, dignity and self-respect must be kept to the minimum consistent with the need to protect the patient and others; b)effect must, if practicable, be given to the patient's wishes so far as that is consistent with – (i) the patient's best interests; and (ii) the need to protect the patient and others. The Least Restrictive Alternative For The Patient

6 Bound by the Rules of Natural Justice Section 56 of the Act states the Tribunal is bound by the rules of natural justice. Section 56 of the Act states the Tribunal is bound by the rules of natural justice. These rules require: These rules require: That the Tribunal is fair; That the Tribunal is fair; That unless there is a substantial risk of harm to the patient or others, were the material disclosed, it does not operate upon material of which the patient is not aware; That unless there is a substantial risk of harm to the patient or others, were the material disclosed, it does not operate upon material of which the patient is not aware; It gives all parties an appropriate chance to participate in the hearing; It gives all parties an appropriate chance to participate in the hearing; It gives all parties an opportunity to comment on material upon which it intends to base its decision. It gives all parties an opportunity to comment on material upon which it intends to base its decision.

7 The Evidence The Tribunal will need to hear evidence from a person who has had the care of a patient and who is qualified to express a view on each of the section 24 or section 40 criteria. The Tribunal will need to hear evidence from a person who has had the care of a patient and who is qualified to express a view on each of the section 24 or section 40 criteria. This need not be the same person. This need not be the same person. The evidence will need to be sufficient that in relation to each criteria the Tribunal can state that it is more likely than not that the criteria are fulfilled. The evidence will need to be sufficient that in relation to each criteria the Tribunal can state that it is more likely than not that the criteria are fulfilled.

8 Section 24 Continuing Care Orders

9 When the Tribunal reviews a Continuing Care Order their role is to ensure that at the time of the hearing:- The section 24 criteria are fulfilled; The section 24 criteria are fulfilled; The detention of the person as an involuntary patient is the least restrictive alternative for the patient after balancing the patient’s right to freedom with the public’s need for safety. The detention of the person as an involuntary patient is the least restrictive alternative for the patient after balancing the patient’s right to freedom with the public’s need for safety. Review of a Continuing Care Order

10 To satisfy this criteria the hospital will need a person to give evidence of the symptoms recently displayed by the patient and what recognised mental illness these symptoms are usually associated with. To satisfy this criteria the hospital will need a person to give evidence of the symptoms recently displayed by the patient and what recognised mental illness these symptoms are usually associated with. This evidence should be given in written or oral form by a psychiatrist or a psychiatric registrar who has observed the patient ’ s symptoms. This evidence should be given in written or oral form by a psychiatrist or a psychiatric registrar who has observed the patient ’ s symptoms. It is important that this evidence comprehensively describes both the positive and negative symptoms that led to the patient’s admission on this occasion. It is important that this evidence comprehensively describes both the positive and negative symptoms that led to the patient’s admission on this occasion. The clinician should point out to the Tribunal the negative symptoms which although not evident to the Tribunal at the hearing are present in the patient, such as lack of motivation, poor concentration and social withdrawal. The clinician should point out to the Tribunal the negative symptoms which although not evident to the Tribunal at the hearing are present in the patient, such as lack of motivation, poor concentration and social withdrawal. Parliament has used the word ‘appears’. It does not require florid or active symptoms to be present at the time of the hearing. Parliament has used the word ‘appears’. It does not require florid or active symptoms to be present at the time of the hearing. The Person Appears to Have a Mental Illness

11 In Consequence A Significant Risk Of Harm Harm: Harm is defined in section 3 as including serious mental or physical deterioration. Harm is defined in section 3 as including serious mental or physical deterioration. Harm can be mental, physical, financial, social, to employment, to a relationship, to the person or to another person Harm can be mental, physical, financial, social, to employment, to a relationship, to the person or to another person Risk of Harm: The risk that this harm will occur must be because of the mental illness The risk that this harm will occur must be because of the mental illness The risk that the harm will occur must be significant The risk that the harm will occur must be significant ‘Significant’ has the ordinary English meaning: major, noteworthy, momentous ‘Significant’ has the ordinary English meaning: major, noteworthy, momentous

12 How Will the Tribunal Determine the Risk of Harm? How Will the Tribunal Determine the Risk of Harm? The best predictor of the future is the past. In order to assess risk the Tribunal will look at the patient’s past behaviour. In order to gauge whether the behaviour is a consequence of the mental illness, and the degree of risk that the behaviour will re-occur, the Tribunal requires evidence of:- The current clinical situation of the patient, including insight, attitude and current symptoms The current clinical situation of the patient, including insight, attitude and current symptoms The factors which will impact upon the patient on discharge, including treatment plan and level of support, level of compliance, stress of living in the community and the presence or absence of stress factors which have in the past led to an episode of illness The factors which will impact upon the patient on discharge, including treatment plan and level of support, level of compliance, stress of living in the community and the presence or absence of stress factors which have in the past led to an episode of illness A key factor which the Tribunal will take into account is the likely timing of the re- occurrence of the behaviour. That is, is the risk imminent, or are we looking at a harm that may happen in 12 months time? A key factor which the Tribunal will take into account is the likely timing of the re- occurrence of the behaviour. That is, is the risk imminent, or are we looking at a harm that may happen in 12 months time?

13 The Detention Is Necessary To Protect The Person Or Others The detention must be necessary not just advisable. The detention must be necessary not just advisable. It must be established that the person or others could not be protected in any other practicable manner. It must be established that the person or others could not be protected in any other practicable manner. That the detention will in fact afford protection from the harm. That the detention will in fact afford protection from the harm.

14 Care or Treatment of The Person The Approved Hospital Is Properly Equipped And Staffed For The Care Or Treatment Of The Person: This requires evidence that the hospital can provide either care or treatment for this particular patient. This requires evidence that the hospital can provide either care or treatment for this particular patient. It does not require the hospital to establish both. It would be sufficient that the hospital is providing care, that is a bed, food,looking after the patient’s physical needs without showing that they are providing any form of treatment for the patient. It does not require the hospital to establish both. It would be sufficient that the hospital is providing care, that is a bed, food,looking after the patient’s physical needs without showing that they are providing any form of treatment for the patient.

15 Least Restrictive Alternative In order to determine if the order is the minimum consistent with safety, the Tribunal requires evidence: That the patient cannot be a voluntary patient That the patient cannot be a voluntary patient In respect of a Continuing Care Order that the patient would not comply with a Community Treatment Order. In respect of a Continuing Care Order that the patient would not comply with a Community Treatment Order.

16 Evidence Of Least Restrictive Alternative The following are the types of evidence that the Tribunal will consider when looking at the least restrictive alternative. In any particular case however it will depend on the context of these occurrences whether they are in fact indicative of another less restrictive alternative not being in the interests of either the public’s or the patient’s safety. In any particular case however it will depend on the context of these occurrences whether they are in fact indicative of another less restrictive alternative not being in the interests of either the public’s or the patient’s safety. The patient has stated that without an order he would not comply with the treatment plan. The patient has stated that without an order he would not comply with the treatment plan. The patient has attempted, or has in the past absconded from the hospital. The patient has attempted, or has in the past absconded from the hospital. The patient is still unwell and is stating that he will leave the hospital. The patient is still unwell and is stating that he will leave the hospital.

17 Section 40 Community Treatment Orders

18 Review of a Community Treatment Order When the Tribunal reviews a Community Treatment Order their role is to ensure that at the time of the hearing The section 40 criteria are fulfilled; The section 40 criteria are fulfilled; After balancing the patient’s right to minimum interference and the need to protect the patient and others the order is the least restrictive alternative in ensuring that the patient’s illness is properly treated After balancing the patient’s right to minimum interference and the need to protect the patient and others the order is the least restrictive alternative in ensuring that the patient’s illness is properly treated

19 To satisfy this criteria the treating team will need a person to give evidence that the person has been diagnosed as suffering a mental illness. To satisfy this criteria the treating team will need a person to give evidence that the person has been diagnosed as suffering a mental illness. This evidence should be given in written or oral form by a psychiatrist or a psychiatric registrar who has observed the patient ’ s symptoms. This evidence should be given in written or oral form by a psychiatrist or a psychiatric registrar who has observed the patient ’ s symptoms. The Person Has a Mental Illness

20 There is, in Consequence, a Significant Risk of Harm to the Person or Others Harm: Harm is defined in section 3 as including serious mental or physical deterioration. Harm is defined in section 3 as including serious mental or physical deterioration. Harm can be mental, physical, financial, social, to employment, to a relationship, to the person or to another person Harm can be mental, physical, financial, social, to employment, to a relationship, to the person or to another person Risk of Harm: The risk that this harm will occur must be because of the mental illness The risk that this harm will occur must be because of the mental illness The risk that the harm will occur must be significant The risk that the harm will occur must be significant ‘Significant’ has the ordinary English meaning: major, noteworthy, momentous ‘Significant’ has the ordinary English meaning: major, noteworthy, momentous

21 How Will the Tribunal Determine the Risk of Harm? How Will the Tribunal Determine the Risk of Harm? The best predictor of the future is the past. In order to assess risk the Tribunal will look at the patient’s past behaviour. In order to gauge whether the behaviour is a consequence of the mental illness, and the degree of risk that the behaviour will re-occur, the Tribunal requires evidence of:- The current clinical situation of the patient, including insight, attitude and current symptoms The current clinical situation of the patient, including insight, attitude and current symptoms The patient ’ s level of compliance with treatment in the past The patient ’ s level of compliance with treatment in the past The level of support and services offered to the patient in the past The level of support and services offered to the patient in the past A key factor which the Tribunal will take into account is the likely timing of any issue arising with compliance. That is, is the risk imminent, or are we looking at a harm that may happen at some unknown point in the future? A key factor which the Tribunal will take into account is the likely timing of any issue arising with compliance. That is, is the risk imminent, or are we looking at a harm that may happen at some unknown point in the future?

22 Unless the Mental Illness is Treated There is, in consequence, a significant risk of harm to the person or others unless the mental illness is treated The Treating Team do not need to establish that at the present time there is a significant risk of harm to the person or others The Treating Team do not need to establish that at the present time there is a significant risk of harm to the person or others They have to establish however that that level of risk would be present were the mental illness not treated They have to establish however that that level of risk would be present were the mental illness not treated

23 The Order is Necessary to Ensure that the Illness is Properly Treated The order must be necessary not just desirable The order must be necessary not just desirable It must be able to ensure proper treatment It must be able to ensure proper treatment Proper treatment is treatment that reduces the patient’s symptomatology, reduces the risk of harm to themselves or others, has regard to the patient’s dignity and self respect and autonomy, and does not produce side effects that significantly hamper the patient’s ability to interact in the community Proper treatment is treatment that reduces the patient’s symptomatology, reduces the risk of harm to themselves or others, has regard to the patient’s dignity and self respect and autonomy, and does not produce side effects that significantly hamper the patient’s ability to interact in the community

24 Facilities or Services are Available The treating team must establish that the facilities or services for the proper treatment of the patient are in fact available for that patient. The treating team must establish that the facilities or services for the proper treatment of the patient are in fact available for that patient. They will need to give evidence of the way in which the patient will be cared for in the community, where and from whom will they receive their treatment, who will ensure compliance, who will assist the patient with life stressors that have previously led to a deterioration of their mental state, and what supports are available to the patient They will need to give evidence of the way in which the patient will be cared for in the community, where and from whom will they receive their treatment, who will ensure compliance, who will assist the patient with life stressors that have previously led to a deterioration of their mental state, and what supports are available to the patient

25 Least Restrictive Alternative In order to determine if the order is the minimum consistent with the illness being properly treated, the Tribunal requires evidence: That the patient cannot be a voluntary patient That the patient cannot be a voluntary patient That the illness cannot be properly treated without an order That the illness cannot be properly treated without an order

26 Evidence of Least Restrictive Alternative The following are the types of evidence that the Tribunal will consider when looking at the least restrictive alternative. In any particular case however it will depend on the context of these occurrences whether they are in fact indicative of another less restrictive alternative not being in the interests of either the public’s or the patient’s safety. In any particular case however it will depend on the context of these occurrences whether they are in fact indicative of another less restrictive alternative not being in the interests of either the public’s or the patient’s safety. The patient has stated that without an order he would not comply with the treatment plan. The patient has stated that without an order he would not comply with the treatment plan. The patient has in the past failed to comply with proper treatment. The patient has in the past failed to comply with proper treatment. The patient without proper treatment is likely to become a significant risk to himself or others. The patient without proper treatment is likely to become a significant risk to himself or others.