WIREDGOV

Department of Health consults on pandemic flu contingency legislation for mental health

News Release issued by the COI News Distribution Service on 10 September 2009

The Department of Health today launched a consultation on whether there is a need to make temporary changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 should exceptional circumstances arise during pandemic flu. The contingency legislation would enable mental health patients to continue to get the treatment they need in the event of severe staff absences.

The 1983 Act enables people with mental health problems to be detained in hospital, where necessary and justified, for care and treatment. The Act sets out a range of processes that professionals have to follow when people need to be detained. For example, detaining someone normally requires the agreement of two doctors.

We are consulting on whether we should temporarily change certain aspects of the 1983 Act in the event of severe staff absences during pandemic flu. The changes would ensure that mental health professionals could continue to operate the Act in the best interests of the patient and for the protection of others.

Strong safeguards would remain in place to protect patients rights, for example, the right to an independent mental health advocate. In addition, if the contingencies are implemented, we also propose to ask the Care Quality Commission to convene an oversight group with representation from national mental health service user and professional bodies to advise on progress and the need for ongoing contingency measures.

Louis Appleby, National Director of Mental Health Services said:

“There are already strong contingency plans in place for pandemic flu in mental health services, as there are for the rest of the NHS.

“It is important that we find out whether temporary changes in the Mental Health Act would help professionals and protect patients. We will also consider what in what kind of exceptional circumstances we might need to use them. It would only be in exceptional circumstances and strong safeguards would remain in place.

“We are determined to make sure we have a sensible, proportionate approach that ensures that vulnerable mental health patients continue to get the treatment they need, when they need it, even in the event of staff absences. It is only sensible to be prepared for every eventuality.”

The proposals fall into three categories:

Reducing the number of doctors required to comply with a number of sections in the 1983 Act – for example, it will be possible to detain someone in hospital under section 2 or 3 and the courts will be able to send someone to hospital rather than prison if just one doctor says this is right instead of the usual two.Extending or suspending time limits that apply to certain actions under some provisions in the 1983 Act – for example the obligation to obtain a second medical opinion about medication when someone has been in hospital for three months or more. Allowing certain additional people to be approved to undertake some specific functions under the 1983 Act – for example some recently-retired approved social workers may be temporarily approved to undertake the role of the approved mental health professional.

Notes to Editors

The full consultation can be found at http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Consultations/Liveconsultations/index.htm and it closes on 7 October 2009.

Responses can be sent to pandemicandmentalhealth@dh.gsi.gov.uk or

Mental Health Legislation Team
Department of Health
Wellington House
133-155 Waterloo Road
London SE1 8UG

Consultation Questions include:

In which circumstances would it be appropriate for the Secretary of State to bring the temporary changes into force?

Who should collect what information about the contingency measures? What arrangements should be made for this information to be passed on?

Should the temporary changes be permissive rather than obligatory - allowing practitioners to use them where circumstances make it necessary but allowing normal safeguards to continue to be adhered to whenever possible?

Should just one medical recommendation be required for a number of actions under part 3 of the 1983 Act and where an approved mental health professional asks for someone to be detained under section 2 or 3 of the 1983 Act?

Should we suspend the obligation to obtain second opinions on medication as part of the temporary measures?

Should we change some time limits as part of the contingency measures? These relate to court orders on conveying people and admitting them to hospital; and Secretary of State warrants on transferring people from prison to hospital.

Should strategic health authorities and local authorities be allowed to approve certain additional people as approved clinicians and approved mental health professionals as part of the contingency changes?

Contacts:

Department of Health
Phone: 020 7210 5221
NDS.DH@coi.gsi.gov.uk