[Claire - Rethink]

Hi mld,

When the term 'sectioned' used it is most often used to refer to the longer term admissions to hospital under the Mental Health Act such as under section 2 or 3.

If you have never had an admission to hospital under one of these section then you could explain that this is the case, but that you have been removed to a place of safety under section 136 in the past.

It is a power that can be used by the police for a short time but it cannot be used to detain someone in hospital for treatment, which is what is most commonly understood from the term 'sectioned'.

Claire

[Chris - Rethink]

Hi Claire,

We have heard from someone on Rethink's Facebook page (www.facebook.com/rethinkcharity) that their son's inquest was held recently:

Quote

"and it seems that in the case of [name removed] because he was a 'voluntary' inpatient this seemed to go against him when we attempted to get him sectioned...even though it was plainly obvious to everyone except the 'professionals' that he was so very ill....a 'professional' that saw him for 20 minutes made the fateful diagnosis that he was not 'that' ill"

What can people do if they feel they are experiencing something similar?

[Jennyb]

Having been sectioned 3 times (all section 3's) - what are the implications of these on my life now?

The last time was in 2006, however having moved on & been well for a longer period i am trying to look for a job & enhance my driving licence with further categories - Will my past prevent me from doing anything?

I have heard that travelling to the USA can be difficult or a problem too after a section 3.

Thanks

[Claire - Rethink]

Quote

We have heard from someone on Rethink's Facebook page (www.facebook.com/rethinkcharity) that their son's inquest was held recently:

If someone agrees to stay in hospital voluntarily (or informally) then it may not be felt necessary to use the Mental Health Act to detain them.

The key for the assessing professionals is to weigh up the risks and whether the person is likely to stay in hospital having given their agreement intially.

If it is felt that the person is so unwell at the time that they cannot realistically give their agreement to stay in hospital informally, then the professionals need to consider whether use of the Mental Health Act is appropriate and necessary in the interests of the person's own health, their own safety or the protections of others.

Being detained formally also gives people certain rights such as the right to have their detention reviewed by a Tribunal. Informal patients do not have this right.

[Claire - Rethink]

Quote

Having been sectioned 3 times (all section 3's) - what are the implications of these on my life now?

The last time was in 2006, however having moved on & been well for a longer period i am trying to look for a job & enhance my driving licence with further categories - Will my past prevent me from doing anything?

I have heard that travelling to the USA can be difficult or a problem too after a section 3.

Hello Jennyb,

In relation to driving, there is loads of guidance on the DVLA's website about periods of stability and medication. There is also information about enhanced drving licence requirements. If your doctor is supportive of your progress then he or she may be happy to provide medical evidence to support you. A link to the site is here:

http://www.dft.gov.u...http://www.dft.gov.uk/dvla/medical.aspx

In relation to to travel to the US. This crops up a lot here at the RAIS and is a concern for a lot of people considering a holiday to the US. The issue of whether someone has been sectioned or not is not really the crucial thing. The Visa Waiver Program (VWP) which allows travel to the US without a visa does make reference to the following:

[i]Travelers to the United States who have been afflicted with a disease of public health significance, a mental disorder which is associated with a display of harmful behavior, or are a drug abuser or addict, are not eligible to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program

If you have been stable for a period of years then a supportive letter from your doctor confirming that your mental health condition is not associated with 'harmful behaviour' will help with being able to travel under the VWP. There's loads of useful info on the US Embassy website:

http://london.usemba...http://london.usembassy.gov/add_req.html

Claire

[Claire - Rethink]

Just to add to the Facebook strand.

If a family member or friend is concerned that someone should have been formally detained under the Mental Health Act instead of being allowed to remain in hospital informally, then the best way of raising these concerns is in writing and to the Responsible Clinician (most usually the consultant psychiatrist in charge of the care) and raising these concerns.

A Mental Health Act assessment is based on clinical judgement of the assessing team applying the criteria of the Mental Health Act. Therefore it is not possible to demand it is used in a particular case. The only practical way to ensure that all risks are fully taken into account is to make sure that all of the information which is likely to be useful/helpful is with the people who are likely to do the assessment. Ultimately, the decision on whether to detain or not rests with the assessing team.

Claire

[Claire - Rethink]

Hello John A,

I am not aware of an existing group currently campaigning for the repeal of the Mental Health Act. The Mental Health Act has been periodically reviewed and revised over the years. The 1957 Act was reviewed and this led to the 1983 Act. The 1983 Act was reviewed and this led to the amendments brought in by the 2007 Act.

As case law develops, parts of the Mental Health Act often come under increased scrutiny, often from a Human Rights perspective and this can led to amendments of the Act in time.

Rethink Campaigns will often focus on specific parts of the Act or specific amendments that have been proposed.

Claire

[KWIN]

KWIN, on 21 January 2011 - 09:20 PM, said:

question for the 25th please:
if a woman resides with her ex husband for a period of 9 months due to her being homeless (therefore not as husband and wife and no care is being provided for her from the ex husband) would he still be classed as nearest relative? also if their adult son resides with them: would this be the nearest relative?

Thanks,
Also once someone has sat in front of the mental health tribunal and they discharge them from a section, is this immediate dischargenfrom the section, or could a cto be planned before they actually leave the ward?

This post has been edited by KWIN: 25 January 2011 - 07:24 PM

[Claire - Rethink]

Hi KWIN,

If the Responsible Clinician (most usually the Consultant Psychiatrist) discharges the section then they will complete a form to confirm this and it will be discharged from this date.

If there is a plan to put a CTO in place then they should not discharge the section 3 and instead complete the paperwork for the CTO as the CTO has the effect of 'suspending' the Section 3 which can be 'reactivated' if the person needs to be recalled back to hospital in the future.

All of the planning for the CTO should be done well in advance and should be discussed with the person who is going to be subject to the CTO and any family members who may be involved.

Everyone should be clear about what the CTO means and what conditions are attached to this. If the section 3 is discharged then this will prevent the CTO being put in place.

Claire

[Claire - Rethink]

Hi there,

Thanks for the webchat today. There were some really interesting questions.

I need to sign off now but if anyone has any queries and would like to contact the RAIS team please do get in touch:

You can contact the RAIS team by email at advice@rethink.org

If you prefer, you can contact the team by phone by calling 0845 456 0455 (or 020 7840 3188 if you would prefer to call a geographic number).

We are open for calls from 10am to 1pm Mondays - Friday.

We also have loads of information which you can download at www.mentalhealthshop.org

Many thanks,

Claire

[rowland]

Claire - Rethink, on 25 January 2011 - 12:41 PM, said:

Hello ebonycat,

CTOs were introduced as a new way of managing care in the community in 2008. CTOs are most commonly used if someone is detained under Section 3 of the MHA in hospital but it is felt that the need to be in hospital has reduced and therefore their care and treatment can be provided in the community.

CTOs can be used for people detained under other sections such as s.37, s.45A, 47 or s.49 but most commonly they will be used when someone has been detained under s.3.

This means that if you have not had a readmission under the Mental Health Act in the last 6 years then a CTO would not have been an option to consider at the time when you were discharged.

Section 117 refers to the legal duty to provide aftercare services to people who have been detained under certain sections of the MHA. This duty continues until the person in question is assessed as no longer in need of aftercare services.

If you feel that you are in need of more support than you are currently receiving then you could ask for your social care needs to be reassessed. If your care is being co-ordinated under the Care Programme Approach programme (CPA) then you could ask your care co-ordinator to do this. If you have an ‘assessed social care need’ then you can ask for a direct payment to meet this need. You must be able to show that what you spend the direct payment on meets the need that you have been assessed as having.

The RAIS has some useful factsheets on Direct Payments and Care and Aftercare which may be helpful to you. You can download them at www.mentalhealthshop.org.

Claire

One issue with the above - if a service user is under s117 aftercare they are not eligible for funding from direct payments. There often seems to be confusion about this but the issue comes down to who pays for what i.e. Nhs trust is liable under s117 and local authority picks up the bill from direct payments. A service user is not entitled to both at the same time.

[Ismailes25]

i read all of the post thank you for information never have to go through that never been danger to myself of other but i still fear that Menthal Health Act might be use against me and i know i might just pass assament because someone just requestet to really hurt me but thoght of even going through that...

[dave]

Chris - Rethink, on 11 January 2011 - 05:26 PM, said:

Hi all,

Claire from Rethink's advice team will be here on the 25th January to answer your questions about the Mental Health Act, also known as the MHA.

Some of our frequently asked questions include:

• How can the MHA be used to admit someone to hospital?
  
• What happens when someone is assessed under the MHA?
  
• Can you be treated without my consent under the MHA?
  
• Who is my Nearest Relative under the MHA? Is this the same as next of kin?

What's your question? Post it here.

I was referred to healthy minds by my doctor, I had 2 phone calls which I missed so I called back,the lady said she was sending an email to mohamed to call me that afternoon or the following day but this was over a week ago. I've since had a letter saying that you've tried to contact me but if you don't hear from me by the 16th may you'll assume I've decided not to take up this service, I would like to talk to somone.

[Chris - Rethink]

Hi Dave, please call our Advice team - www.rethink.org/advice

I'm closing this topic now, just because it's supposed to be just for the webchat event we had - feel free to use other topics and forums.

Chris