§ 18 and 19. Mr. Doddsasked the Minister of Health (1) what compensation has been paid to Miss Edith Haithwaite for her illegal detention in Rampton Mental Hospital for seventeen years and seven months until released by a decision of the Divisional Court of the Queen's Bench Division;
(2) in view of the illegal incarceration of Miss Edith Haithwaite in Rampton Mental Hospital from 16th July, 1939, until 10th April, 1957, and the fact that she was usefully employed in the hospital, how much money was given to her on her release; and in what other ways she was helped by or on behalf of his Department in the task of rehabilitation after her long absence from the outside world.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithThe Board of Control acted in good faith in detaining Miss Haithwaite on an order made by a court and valid on the face of it, and, therefore, no compensation has been paid. On discharge she was, in accordance with existing practice, given an outfit of clothing and a payment of £1, together with the credit balance of £1 4s. 10d. in her hospital account. The local health authority was advised of her discharge so that it could give her any necessary help.
§ Mr. DoddsDoes not the right hon. and learned Gentleman think it is disgraceful that this woman was held illegally for nearly eighteen years and that for several years she worked all day long on the sock-making machine and at night, after the patients went to bed, was cleaning and sweeping up the place for 6s. a week? Is he aware that she could not wear the clothes which were given her on her discharge because she appeared such a ludicrous figure in them? Does he not think something should be done to help this poor woman who is now out of work? Is it not a shame? Does this not reveal the shocking system of slave labour in mental hospitals?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithThe hon. Gentleman is accustomed to use extravagant language on these matters—
§ Mr. Walker-Smith—which I and thinking people generally will, I am sure, discount. Miss Haithwaite was, in fact, receiving a weekly reward payment of I Is. for work in the knitting room at the time she was discharged. It has been explained over and over again to the hon. Gentleman that these payments are intended only as an inducement to patients to engage and persist in therapeutic activity. Some of the work is useful to the hospitals, some is not, but that is not the criterion. It is the therapeutic aspect for the patient which is the criterion which we have to have in mind.
§ Dr. SummerskillWhile everybody accepts the fact that the therapeutic aspect is important, does the right hon. and learned Gentleman not agree that it is possible to run these mental hospitals at a cost of £6 10s. per head, as against between £20 and £30 per head for general hospitals, only because the patients in the mental hospitals are able to do the necessary work? Surely it would be right and proper, after this woman has worked for seventeen years giving good service to the hospitals, that some arrangement should be made whereby she could be allowed to face the world with more than £1 in her possession?
§ Mr. Walker-SmithNo, I think the basic reason for the difference between the costs of these hospitals and the general hospitals is not so much that referred to by the right hon. Lady as the difference in the cost of treatment and the different ratio of long-stay patients in the mental hospitals. If the remuneration were to be tied to the economic value to the hospital, it might have a beneficial effect for some patients and an adverse effect for others. It would also not be a proper criterion, as I have said, in deciding upon the sort of work which ought to be offered in the therapeutic interest of the patient.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsHere is a lady who was detained illegally for seventeen years and who has been discharged and has been given only £1. Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman say whose responsibility it is for ensuring that somebody who has been illegally detained in this way is properly rehabilitated in life outside the hospital? He will appreciate that nowadays £1 will last little beyond a day.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithIt is true that her order was invalid in that it was made without jurisdiction, but if the right hon. Gentleman will study the judgment of the Divisional Court he will see that Mr. Justice Hilbery pointed out, in giving judgment, that the Court was far from satisfied that the application for discharge was in the patient's interest—
§ Mr. Walker-Smith—and also that it must not be thought that the court was saying that she was not a mental defective and might have been properly certified and placed and detained in an institution.
As for rehabilitation, I have already indicated that notice was given to the local health authority concerned, and an officer from that department called upon Miss Haithwaite and her sister inviting them to get in touch with him if at any time they wanted his assistance.
§ Mr. J. GriffithsMay I put it to the Minister that, surely, when a release of this kind is made, arrangements should be made by the appropriate authorities to ensure that somebody in these circumstances is adequately provided for immediately with accommodation.
§ Mr. Walker-SmithYes, the question of subsistence in case of need in that as in other cases is the responsibility of the National Assistance Board—
§ Mr. Walker-SmithIn that as in other cases, of course; but the right hon. Gentleman was referring more specifically to rehabilitation, and, therefore, it is proper that the hospital should advise the local health authority in order that it can follow up the case and give any necessary assistance in that context which is required. That was the procedure followed in this case.