Clause 6
Mental Health Bill [Lords]
5:00 pm
Angela Browning (Deputy Chairman (Organising and Campaigning), Conservative Party; Tiverton and Honiton, Conservative)
I am not suggesting otherwise for a moment. During our debates, I have made clear my concern about the lack of continuity in the community of people who may or may not have been treated as in-patients, but who have certainly come under the umbrella of mental health services. In my experience of looking at cases—fortunately none was as serious as the Stone case—I encountered a case in which a constituent fell through the net, did not receive ongoing attention from the mental health services and murdered his mother. I do not need to be signed up to the idea that we should be seeking to help such people.
What is the best form of treatment for the person has to be down to the clinical judgment of someone who has had many years studying such complex cases. That is the point. It is not that I am disparaging others and saying that they do not have a role to play—even a very senior role. Of course they do. However, I do not see the logic in the idea of taking decision making away from the person who was involved originally at a senior level in admitting the person for detention. It does not seem to make sense. I must therefore ask myself what is behind the Minister’s motivation for being so opposed to the clause.