|
Post by Admin on Sept 5, 2019 14:10:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 6, 2019 12:04:22 GMT
Over the space of around 10 years in the 1990's i was placed on 4 section 136's - 4 section 2's - 1 section 3 & a section 117.
i can see all sides to the argument / debate around it all.
|
|
|
Post by snowstorm on Sept 6, 2019 19:50:54 GMT
It is very tricky, but I still think there is an argument for having a distinction with Section 3 between risk to self and risk to others i.e. if risk is assessed as to self alone, should the patient be on forced treatment on a locked ward if they disagree with the treatment?
Not an easy issue though, illness is illness.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 7, 2019 7:51:40 GMT
It is very tricky, but I still think there is an argument for having a distinction with Section 3 between risk to self and risk to others i.e. if risk is assessed as to self alone, should the patient be on forced treatment on a locked ward if they disagree with the treatment? Not an easy issue though, illness is illness. This is it - some people are very severely ill & a danger to themselves & others. The emphasis is more & more on recovery & helping people stay in the community, but that is dependent upon being able to access proper housing & proper social security & social care systems; which have been devastated under the Tories. The general treatment approaches as well i feel could also be a lot better. But am sure that the NHS / staff try their best.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 7, 2019 19:19:17 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 9, 2019 8:20:00 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 9, 2019 8:21:12 GMT
Mental Health and Capacity Law This page is just some of the various Acts of Parliament, Codes of Practice and other materials which may be required when navigating mental health and capacity law. Inevitably, there are many more statutes which influence the resources highlighted below. Chief amongst these are the Human Rights Act 1998 and the Health & Safety at Work Act 1974. mentalhealthcop.wordpress.com/resources/
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 9, 2019 8:38:07 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 9, 2019 9:09:58 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Sept 19, 2019 19:11:39 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 18, 2020 17:56:18 GMT
i don't see how this could be resolved? Unless there was a massive funding / resource program put into mental health, which just isn't going to happen. Serious & complex questions about crime & mental illness as well. Policing Has No Place in Mental Health Support novaramedia.com/2020/07/15/policing-has-no-place-in-mental-health-support/Ask people to name the frontline mental health service in the UK and you’ll probably receive a few different answers. Some might say specialist mental health crisis teams, others the ambulance service, or even A&E doctors. But in fact, you can make a decent argument that it’s the police. While no firm figures are available, between 15 and 25% of police incidents are estimated to relate to mental health, with responses to them occupying up to 40% of police time. This compares to around 10% of ambulance callouts and just over 1% of A&E attendances that are recorded as mental health-related. Indeed, the oversized role played by the police in responding to such incidents is alarming given how little mental health training officers receive – usually a course lasting only 12 hours. Policing the crisis. Data on uses of section 136 of the Mental Health Act, under which an officer can detain someone who appears “to be suffering from mental disorder” for up to 36 hours, confirm the police’s disproportionate involvement in the UK’s mental health system. In 2018/19, police in England and Wales sectioned people 33,238 times – a 12% increase on the previous year. Strikingly, the police detained people only slightly less frequently than mental health professionals – to compare, there were 49,988 detentions under the Mental Health Act across all of the psychiatric institutions in England in the same period. In a rare moment of consensus, both police abolitionists and the Association of Chief Police Officers believe that this state of affairs is profoundly wrong. The public also agree, with 70% of people viewing mental health as the sole responsibility of health services, while only 2% see a role for the police. Despite this, emergency mental health care remains a patchwork affair. Schemes to provide specialist mental health ambulances are in their infancy. Meanwhile, the most recent NHS mental health report revealed that access to one-third of specialist crisis teams is strictly limited – meaning you’d need a diagnosis and a referral to gain access to support. A similar number of these teams have limited operating hours, and consequently, the police, as a 24/7 service, fills in the gaps. These shortcomings in crisis care – and the resulting reliance on police – are partly a result of a decade of government austerity, with record demands for mental health services coinciding with the longest funding squeeze since the foundation of the NHS. Since at least the mid-2000s, police have carried out tens of thousands of detentions each year. In 2005/6, the first year in which figures were recorded, section 136s were used 16,995 times, rising to 23,036 by 2013/14. It is of course no coincidence that the police is involved on such a large scale. The modern mental health system has always had a dual role: not only to provide care but to maintain order. The language of the Mental Health Act captures this dichotomy, authorising police to intervene whenever “a person believed to be suffering from mental disorder” is “being ill-treated, neglected or kept otherwise than under proper control”. Through this phrasing, it becomes clear that the prevention of abuse is weighed equally with the disciplining of perceived threats to social order.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jul 18, 2020 23:24:38 GMT
Police Are the First to Respond to Mental Health Crises. They Shouldn’t Be "This is the only medical illness that we use criminal justice to respond to." www.vice.com/en_us/article/3azkeb/police-are-the-first-to-respond-to-mental-health-crises-they-shouldnt-beWhen mental healthcare options dry up, mentally ill people end up in jail. In 2015, The Sentencing Project, a Washington D.C.-based research and advocacy center, compared states' rates of incarceration to how much mental healthcare access they had. They found that states with less access to mental healthcare have more adults in the criminal justice system. Six out of 10 states with the least access to care have the highest rates of incarceration. Bureau of Justice statistics from 2011 to 2012 found that half of people in prison and two-thirds of people in jail had current “serious psychological distress” or a history of mental health problems. In 2015, people with severe mental illness took up at least 1 in 5 of America’s prison and jail beds. An investigation by the Marshall Project in 2018 found that 30 percent of California state prisoners had a serious mental illness that required consistent treatment; in New York, it was 20 percent, and in Texas, 21 percent. “I don’t think you’ll find much debate in the literature that, since deinstitutionalization was implemented across the US, beginning in the 1960s, the complementary, necessary funding of community mental health systems to care for people with severe mental illness has been insufficient,” said Michael Rogers, a forensic psychiatrist and staff psychiatrist at San Quentin State Prison in California. Private hospitals and community centers can provide some care, but mostly for people with health insurance or those who seek out treatment voluntarily. For the uninsured or severely ill who are resistant to treatment, there are few other places for them to go. If a person is deemed mentally incompetent, they often have to wait in jail for an opening at a state psychiatric facility. Most of the state bed-wait lists are filled with inmates who need to be evaluated before they can stand trial. The wait is around 30 days in most states, but can stretch up to six months or a year, as in Travis's case.
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Mar 31, 2022 13:37:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Oct 4, 2022 21:03:54 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 7, 2022 22:27:55 GMT
Preparing for an Appeal Tribunal online course - November 2022 Register Now This online course is aimed at professionals who work in advice or advocacy who need to know about how to prepare an Appeal Tribunal. This course will be run in two parts over consecutive half days This course is for staff working with people of all ages who are affected by a health condition or a disability and challenging a benefits decision at tribunal (note that a working age PIP case study is used). A working knowledge of Personal Independence Payment and the Work Capability Assessment is assumed. The course will be delivered by our trusted partners the Benefits Training Company, which we help underpin by block booking dedicated places for Disability Rights UK members. We know from previous work together how knowledgeable and experienced their trainers are. It is a practical course delivered using a combination of trainer presentation, exercises and case studies, group discussion and games. Participants will be provided with e-learning supporting material including PowerPoint slides and a comprehensive training pack. Part 1: Assessing the case, reviewing the DWP decision - Thursday 17 November 9.45 - 12.45 Part 2: Composing effective written submissions, preparing claimants for appeal hearings - Friday 18 November 9.45 - 12.45 By the end of the two sessions participants will Have an understanding of the decision making and appeals framework and the different mechanisms for getting a decision changed Know how to check for inconsistencies in the claimant’s evidence and how to manage inconsistencies Have practiced working on a real life case example Be able to check key documents within a DWP submission Know how to form effective arguments to challenge inaccuracies in the DWP submission Know when and how it is appropriate to obtain further evidence to support an appeal Be aware of Tribunal Procedure and how an oral hearing is conducted Be able to prepare the claimant so they can present in the most appropriate way and help the tribunal reach the right decision Know what can be done if the claimant is unhappy with the outcome of the hearing. Please note this course is not for individual claimants. How to join after booking You will receive a Zoom link and the pack attachments by email. Please download the attachments before logging in. We recommend you use the link to login 15 minutes before the event. You will need a Wi-Fi connection and a suitable device to access the internet. You may also wish to have a pen and paper to make notes. When November 17th, 2022 9:45 AM to November 18th, 2022 12:45 PM Location Remote learning - delivered online United Kingdom Event Fee(s) DR UK organisational member £ 150.00 www.disabilityrightsuk.org/civicrm/event/info
|
|