THE head of a government watchdog has warned key reforms planned to mental health legislation would weaken the rights of vulnerable people.
Colin McKay, the chief executive of the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, is concerned about proposals by ministers including ones which would increase the length some patients would have to wait to have their cases heard at a tribunal.
Anyone detained for up to 28 days for their safety or wellbeing has to wait up to five days for a tribunal hearing to put their case that they can be released – or hear if they will be detained under a compulsory treatment order for six months or longer.
However, under proposals being put forward in the Mental Health Bill, ministers want to extend this period to 10 days.
McKay told The National: “One recurring issue for us is changes to legal timescales for action.The changes are about different situations, but their combined effect is a weakening of the rights of people who are mentally ill and vulnerable.
“We are concerned that this may be because of a focus on easing administrative burden rather than on patient care.The Bill proposes increasing the additional time a person on short-term – 28-day – detention can continue to be detained pending a tribunal hearing from the current five days to 10 days. We do not agree with this.”
The Scottish Government has said the extension is necessary so that a patient can get the best access to legal support.
But in its submission to the Bill, the Law Society said the extension was undesirable.
Bob Doris, the SNP MSP and deputy convener of the health committee which is examining the Bill, yesterday put down an amendment to keep the waiting period to five days. Members of the committee agreed to accept his amendment.
McKay also raised concerns over changes to “suspension of detention” where a person has been detained under the Mental Health Act, but their detention has been suspended by a doctor, who believes they are ready to try living back into the community.
McKay said the current system is complex, and supports moves to change so a patient should be able to live in the community for up to 200 days, after which the Mental Health Tribunal should examine their situation.
However, in the Bill ministers have proposed this period should continue to 300 days.
McKay believes this is too long a period to leave a patient “in limbo” and that 200 days is a sufficient length of time to assess whether the patient should be released from “the suspension of detention”, or receive more treatment by being detained in hospital.
Labour MSP Richard Simpson, a member of the committee, has put down an amendment calling for the period to be limited to 200 days, and McKay hopes it will receive the committee’s support.
He added: “We can be proud of our mental health legislation, which is among the most progressive in the world, but we need to be vigilant to ensure we continue to focus on the human rights of some of the most vulnerable people in our society.
“We are pleased that the Government has responded to some of these concerns, but we hope the committee will continue to press them on the problem areas which remain.”
The NHS and local authorities have a legal duty to ensure mental health patients have access to independent advocacy services, but McKay said there is evidence this is not always the case.
The commission wants the Bill to ensure councils and health boards set out clearly what they are doing to meet their legal responsibilities.
McKay said: “One big step the government could make would be to respond positively to the amendment proposed by the Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance.
“This would ensure the NHS and local authorities live up to their legal duties to ensure people with mental health problems and learning disabilities have access to independent advocacy.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here