§ Sub-section (4) Where an order is made: for sending a defective to an institution which is not conducted in accordance with the religious persuasion to which he belongs, the nearest adult relative, or in the case of a child his guardian or person entitled to his custody, may apply to the Board to remove or send the defective to an institution conducted in accordance with the defective's religious persuasion, and the Board shall on proof of the defective's religious persuasion comply with the request of the applicant; provided that the applicant must show to the satisfaction of the Board that the managers of the institution named by him are willing to receive the defective.
§ Lords Amendment: At the end of the Clause, insert the words "and that the institution is one suitable to the ease."
§ Lords Amendment agreed to.
§ Lords Amendment:—
§ After Clause 17, insert the following new Clause:—
§ "The nearest adult relative or the guardian of a defective in an institution or under guardianship under this Act shall be entitled to visit the defective at such times and at such intervals (not exceeding six months) and on such conditions as may be prescribed, except where, owing to the character and antecedents of the person proposing to visit the defective, the Board consider that such a visit would be contrary to the interests of the defective."
2580§ Mr. CHARLES BATHURSTI contemplate some difficulty as to the interpretation of the words "nearest adult relative." It is not "relative" or "relatives." I think it will be very hard to say whether, for instance, a father or mother is the nearest adult relative to a child, or which of several adult children might be regarded as the nearest adult relative. It seems to me that you want the words "or relatives," otherwise how are you going to determine who is the nearest adult relative when you have more than one person in an equal degree of consanguinity?
§ Mr. WEDGWOODI gladly recognise that nearly all the Amendments we are now considering which have been made in the House of Lords are advances towards individual liberty, and therefore safeguards, which we owe to Lord Salisbury's Amendments in the other place; but I am a little doubtful about this Amendment. When the Bill was going through the House, I understood from the Home Secretary that there would be drawn up by him regulations which would give very free access to these defectives, not only to their parents or nearest adult relatives, but to their families. I hope the effect of this Amendment will not be that this right of access will be allowed merely to certain specified persons. It is of the utmost importance, if these institutions are to be really homes, that the right of access to the children and to the grown-ups should be as easy as practicable. I should like to have some word from the Home Secretary as to the possibility of these defectives being let out for week-ends and allowed to see their friends and relatives. I am inclined to think the Amendment as it stands provides that the conditions under which the people will be in these institutions will be more prison-like than the Home Secretary originally intended.
§ Mr. McKENNAThat was precisely the reason why on a former occasion I thought it advisable to invite the House not to accept an Amendment of this kind, not that I in the slightest degree object to the Amendment, but inasmuch as the proposal put into an Act of Parliament must necessarily in the circumstances of the case be a minimum proposal. It always has the effect of conveying the impression that the actual words of the Statute limit what is going to be done. I can assure my hon. Friend that that is not so. There will be occasions under the rules for visits suitable to the particular condition of every 2581 patient. In a great many cases the patients will not only be at liberty to go outside the institutions for week-ends, but they will come out daily. There will be nothing in the nature of a prison in these institutions. These words are inserted here to give a statutory right to visits of a particular kind, but it must not be understood for one moment that the statutory minimum includes the whole of the people who can make visits to patients in an institution. With regard to the objection taken by the hon. Member opposite (Mr. C. Bathurst), I think the word "nearest" might well be construed as meaning a relative than whom there was no nearer relative; consequently relatives in an equal degree of consanguinity would all be regarded as the nearest.
§ Mr. C. BATHURSTAm I right in supposing this will be interpreted as meaning "relative or relatives"?
§ Mr. McKENNACertainly; it will be the father or mother, or possibly both. It is a statutory minimum only. The rules will provide for the case mentioned by the hon. Momber.
§ Lords Amendment agreed to.