HC Deb 30 January 2004 vol 417 cc560-1W
Mrs. Helen Clark

To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will make a statement on the relationship between the criminal guardianship powers in the Mental Health Act 1983 and the community treatment orders proposed in the Draft Mental Health Bill 2002. [149798]

Ms Rosie Winterton

Like the guardianship order, the proposed power—that the courts would make a mental health order without requiring residence in hospital—could enable people who needed treatment subject to sanction to receive it without resort to detention in hospital. Unlike the guardianship order, the proposed power would enable the admission of the person to hospital for compulsory treatment in the event of that becoming necessary for his own health or safety or that of others.

Mrs. Helen Clark

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the target groups of people with mental health problems who will be helped by the introduction of community treatment orders. [149800]

Ms Rosie Winterton

The provisions in the draft Mental Health Bill for formal powers to be used in the community are based on the principle of least restriction. When treating someone for mental disorder under formal powers, the restriction of their liberty should be the minimum necessary, taking into account all their circumstances and the need to protect themselves or others. The conditions setting out the circumstances in which formal powers may be used, must always be satisfied, whether treatment is to be provided in hospital or in the community. The power to impose requirements on patients in the community will however, in some circumstances, avoid patients having to go to hospital if appropriate alternative arrangements can be made.

The most important group that it is intended that these powers would be used for is people who have a history of admission to hospital, improvement and discharge, followed by relapse (known as "revolving door" patients). Currently there may be no alternative to renewed admission to hospital. Where someone is well known to services it may not be necessary for them to be reassessed and treated in hospital. Treatment under a regime of conditions and requirements in the community may be more appropriate and avoid the distress of repeated unplanned admissions to hospital.

These powers would also be available for those whose mental condition has improved while being treated under compulsion in hospital and for whom formal treatment in the community would provide a supportive transition, helping to prevent patients relapsing on discharge from hospital. There may also be other individual cases in which treatment under compulsion in the community would be more appropriate.

Formal treatment in the community will also be an option for the Court to consider for mentally disordered offenders. It is intended that convicted offenders who require treatment for mental disorder could benefit if the court is satisfied that they do not need to be detained and clinicians confirm that treatment appropriate for the individual is available in the community.

The decision that compulsory treatment in the community is appropriate should always be based on the careful assessment of what is the most suitable way to treat and care for individual patients, taking into account all the circumstances of each individual case.