§ 5. Mr. Doddsasked the Minister of Health why a box of important documents taken by Mrs. Harriet Thornton to Cane Hill Mental Hospital was allowed to remain in a ward for three and a half years despite correspondence on the subject from the official solicitor appointed to look after Mrs. Thornton's affairs; and, in view of the fact that this is a breach of the lunacy law, what action he proposes to take.
§ Mr. TurtonMy information is that Mrs. Thornton did not bring the box with her on admission, and it was therefore not included in the inventory of her belongings. Later she asked the ward sister to put it in the ward store room 1361 saying that it contained private letters; and she did not mention it when the medical superintendent subsequently asked her about the whereabouts of certain documents required by the official solicitor. She did not ask for it until after her discharge, when after a search it was found still locked away. Owing to the lapse of time the box had been overlooked, but I am not aware that there was any breach of the law.
§ Mr. DoddsIs the Minister aware that this lady, when she was forcibly taken to a mental home, took these important documents with her? When persons are certified, surely the authorities want to know what certified patients are taking into mental homes, and is not there some degree of slackness if they were unaware that these documents were there the whole of the time?
§ Mr. TurtonI think the hon. Gentleman is under a misapprehension? She did bring in certain documents on her admission. They were included in the inventory, and in due course those wanted by the official solicitor were handed to him. The other documents in this box were brought in later, I am informed, by a visitor.
§ 6 and 7. Mr. Doddsasked the Minister of Health (1) under what authority the Cane Hill Mental Hospital Management Committee asked for and received from the official solicitor acting on behalf of Mrs. Harriet Thornton payment of money from her estate whilst she was still certified and a National Health Service patient;
(2) why an approach was not made by the hospital management committee to the husband of Mrs. Thornton for payment towards her maintenance whilst in the care of the Cane Hill Mental Hospital.
§ Mr. TurtonWhile this patient was in the hospital her maintenance was the financial responsibility of the management committee. An order made under the Lunacy Act, 1890, appointing the official solicitor receiver of her estate provided for the payment of £39 a year for extra comforts, which she duly received. When she was granted leave on trial and went to the after-care home, the committee made an allowance towards the cost as they have discretion to do under Section 55 of the Lunacy 1362 Act, 1890. They neither requested nor received payment for her maintenance from her estate, and they were not concerned with any liability of her husband to contribute.
§ Mr. DoddsThis is a fantastic state of affairs Is the Minister saying that the official solicitor was not asked that money should be paid towards her maintenance and that the official solicitor did not pay that money and that it is there in her estate, and that her husband, who was responsible for getting her put away in this place, was not asked to pay one penny piece? Will the Minister have another look into this matter, because all the evidence indicates that he has been bamboozled by the reports he is getting?
§ Mr. TurtonIf the hon. Gentleman studies the Answer, which I am afraid was very long, he will see quite clearly what the position was and that nothing wrong was done. The procedure for ensuring that the husband pays for the wife's maintenance in a mental hospital is through the matrimonial court
§ Mr. DoddsOwing to the very unsatisfactory nature of the answer, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.