280 likes | 399 Views
You have asked questions about:. • the definition of ‘ mental disorder ’ • the review procedures for compulsory patients • the scope of ‘ treatment ’ under the MH Act • the effect of advance directives • conflicts of interests and the District Inspector
E N D
You have asked questions about: • • the definition of ‘mental disorder’ • • the review procedures for compulsory patients • • the scope of ‘treatment’ under the MH Act • • the effect of advance directives • • conflicts of interests and the District Inspector • • voting rights of people under MH Act
A Discussion of the Mental Health Act • John Dawson • Faculty of Law • University of Otago • July 2011
Question: • Is the term ‘mental disorder’ • or ‘mentally disordered’ • likely to remain in the Act?
Legal criteria for compulsory treatment under Mental Health Act 'Mental disorder', in relation to any person, means an abnormal state of mind (whether of a continuous or an intermittent nature), characterised by delusions, or by disorders of mood or perception or volition or cognition, of such a degree that it- • Poses a serious danger to the health or safety of that person or of others; or (b) Seriously diminishes the capacity of that person to take care of himself or herself. • AND compulsory treatment is ‘necessary’.
The purposes of the legal standards governing compulsory treatment • • To include some situations under the Act: • where there are clear disturbances of particular mental functions (mood, perceptions, thought processes, etc) • AND • • To exclude other situations: where total behaviour • is unusual, but there is no clear disturbance of a particular mental function.
Sir Aubrey Lewis,in ‘Health as a social concept’,(1953) 4 Brit J Sociology 109 • Mental ill health is best defined in terms of evidentdisturbance of particular functions of the mind, not in terms of disturbed social functioning alone. • “If non-conformity can be detected only in total behaviour, while all theparticular psychological functions seem unimpaired, health will be presumed, not illness.”
The purposes of the legal standards governing compulsory treatment • • To include some situations under the Act: • where there are clear disturbances of particular mental functions (mood, perceptions, thought processes, etc) • AND • • To exclude other situations: where total behaviour • is unusual, but there is no clear disturbance of a particular mental function.
Could the legal standards for compulsion be based on incapacity to consent to treatment, without reference to ‘mental disorder’? • The law has well-established incapacity tests: • • Inability to understand, recall, process, appreciate, or weigh relevant treatment information; or • • Complete inability to communicate a decision. • Eg, section 2 Mental Capacity Act 2005 • (England and Wales).
Possible problems with greater recognition of a right to refuse treatment for patients with capacity to consent • • May prevent control of people who are ‘mentally disordered’ and ‘dangerous’ but retain their capacity to consent. • • May prevent intervention for people who are ‘mentally disordered’ and suicidal, or self-harming, but retain their capacity to consent. • • May reduce continuity of treatment for people whose capacity fluctuates. • • May preclude sustained care for those whose capacity is restored only through involuntary treatment.
Question: • What is the process if a person does not agree with a treatment order and wants a court hearing? • >> It depends on where they are • in the MH Act’s process.
The compulsory treatment process in NZ • • application for assessment made by any person over 18 • • certification by one medical practitioner • • powers of entry, detention, transportation (Police available) • • compulsory assessment examination by a specialist • • certification by that specialist • • 3 periods of compulsory psychiatric assessment (5, 14, 14 days) • • application by Responsible Clinician for • Compulsory Treatment Order (Inpatient or Community TO) • • hearing before a Family or District Court Judge • • Compulsory Treatment Order for 6 months • • treatment ‘for mental disorder’ in hospital or community • • ongoing reviews before Court and Review Tribunal • • immediate discharge when ‘no longer mentally disordered’
Review options for compulsory patients • • During month of assessment: section 16, urgent judicial hearing • • After 1 month: CompTO hearing b4 District Court Judge (DCJ) • • After 3 months of CompTO and clinical review: • application for hearing b4 Review Tribunal • • After 6 months of CompTO: renewal of order by DCJ • • After 9 months of CompTO and clinical review: • application for hearing b4 Review Tribunal • • After 12 months of CompTO: order made indefinite by DCJ • • Thereafter: 1 Review Tribunal application every 6 months • Complaint of breach of patients’ rights: to District Inspector • Backstop jurisdiction: a High Court inquiry under section 84.
Question: • How wide is the definition • of ‘treatment’ under the Act?
Powers to treat patients under MH Act • Section 30(1) • Every inpatient order shall require the continued detention of the patient in hospital … for the purposes of treatment, and shall require the patient to accept that treatment. • Section 59(1) • Every patient who is subject to a Compulsory Treatment Order shall … be required to accept such treatment for mental disorder as the responsible clinician shall direct. • Subject to a second opinion from another psychiatrist, after the first month of a CompTO, if the patient does not consent.
Community Treatment Powers • • a duty on the patient to accept psychiatric treatment • • to accept visits and attend appointments • • to live where directed • • power of swift recall to hospital, without re-certification • • police assistance available in that process • • treatment without consent in a hospital or clinic • • no ‘forced medication’ in community settings
What is ‘treatment for mental disorder’under the Mental Health Act? • In addition to measures aimed directly at treatment of mental disorders, this includes: • • diagnostic tests • • treatment to alleviate symptoms or prevent deterioration • • nursing care and rehabilitation • • surgery following self-harm or ingestion of objects • • treatment where the refusal is a ‘manifestation of mental disorder’. • But no power to treat ‘physical disorders unrelated to mental disorder within the meaning of the Act’: • B Hoggett: Mental Health Law (4th ed, London, 1995).
Treatments held covered by equivalent provisions of UK Mental Health Act 1983: • • ‘necessary pre-requisites’ to psychiatric treatment • • ‘structured environment of the hospital’ • • forced feeding in anorexia or psychotic self-starvation • • caesarian section, where refusal was based on delusional beliefs, foetus seriously at risk, mother keen to have child, its death would exacerbate her mental disorder. • One hard case: • • contraception for an acutely unwell patient when pregnancy could cause her grave harm.
Question: • Can a person under the MH Act • be forced to have an abortion?
Question: • Can a person under the MH Act • be forced to have an abortion? • • This is unlikely, and cannot be approved solely by a Responsible Clinician under the MH Act. • • An abortion without the woman’s consent might possibly proceed where: • - the woman lacked the capacity to give consent • - 2 consultants certified, under the Contraception, Sterilisation and Abortion Act 1977, that there would be ‘serious danger’ to the woman’s health if the pregnancy continued.
Question: • What is the effect of an advance directive made by a person who later comes under the MH Act? • It constitutes a clear expression of that person’s views, • so should be considered in discussions about treatment. • BUT • an advance directive refusing treatment • is trumped by the powers to treat • provided by the MH Act.
An advance directive requestingtreatment without consent‘if I become unwell again’ • would not authorise a person’s detention for any length of time without invoking the procedures of the MH Act, • because that would deny the person the benefits of those procedures: • eg, their right of access to a court.
Question: • Is there a conflict of interest where a District Inspector has previously represented a person under the Act?
Question: • Is there a conflict of interest where a District Inspector has previously represented a person under the Act? • It depends on the task the DI is performing at the time. • Yes, • if the DI is inquiring into a breach of patients’ rights • (how would it look from the point of view of the staff?). • No, • if the DI is simply informing the patient of their rights.
Question: • Can I still vote if I am under the MH Act? • Yes • except for certain special patients • detained for more than 3 years • following an order of a criminal court.
Question: • If I am under the MH Act, • who gets to appoint an advocate for me? • • A patient advocate would be designated by the patient advocacy service (only a few advocates are employed by them). • • In theory, you can choose your own lawyer, but very few lawyers do MH Act work, so the choice may be very limited in practice.
Question: • Who will pay me to attend to attend • a MH Act hearing before the judge, • if I have to take time off work?
Question: • Who will pay me to attend to attend • a MH Act hearing before the judge, • if I have to take time off work? • No-one • But perhaps you could negotiate a more suitable time for the hearing through the • Registrar of the Court: eg, 4pm.
Question: • When will the MH Act be reviewed? • I don’t know. • MH Act not currently under review, • as far as I am aware. • Currently under review: • • Alcoholism and Drug Addiction Act 1966 • • Aspects of unfitness to stand trial, under • Criminal Procedure (Mentally Impaired Persons) Act 2003.