Clause 43
Mental Health Bill [Lords]
11:45 am
Tim Loughton (Shadow Minister (Children), Health; East Worthing and Shoreham, Conservative)
I beg to move amendment No. 7, in clause 43, page 41, line 6, at end add—
‘(4) In Section 135(6) for the words from “means” to the end of that subsection substitute—
“(a) (i) residential accommodation provided by a local social services authority under Part III of the National Assistance Act 1948 (c.29),
(ii) a hospital as defined by this Act,
(iii) an independent hospital or care home for mentally disordered persons,
(iv) any other suitable place the occupier of which is willing temporarily to receive the patient or, if, in the circumstances of the case it is impracticable to use any of these places,
(b) a police station.”.
(5) In Section 136 (Mentally disordered persons found in public places) of the 1983 Act after subsection (2) insert—
“(3) Where a police station is used as the place of safety the person may not be detained there for a period longer than 24 hours.”.’.
It is me again, Mr. Cook. The amendment to clause 43 is slightly longer and it deals with the subject of places of safety. I know that a number of hon. Members have expressed concerns about the matter in the past. The amendment is to section 136 of the Mental Health Act 1983. We want to define places of safety with particular reference to the use of police stations, which are apparently being used under the definitions of the Bill far too often and inappropriately.
So the purpose of the amendment is to change the definition of a “place of safety”, to ensure that as far as possible it should be not a police cell but a therapeutic environment. When a police station is used as a place of safety, because nothing else is available, the patient must be transferred to a therapeutic environment, which is more appropriate, within 24 hours.
I have some experience of such a situation. I had a surgery case last year involving a constituent’s son-in-law, who had had a severe psychotic episode. He had no previous experience or record of any serious mental illness. He got involved in a quite bizarre incident requiring a number of armed police and was taken into custody. No one was hurt, but he clearly had—for want of a better word—flipped. He was taken to the custody suite of the police station, where he stayed for several days.
He was not transferred to a hospital environment. He was not dealt with properly at the police station. His condition worsened severely while he was in custody. The reason why he was not transferred was that the reviewing clinician—from the Maudsley hospital in south London—was on holiday and there was no one covering. So, for completely unacceptable reasons, the son-in-law of my constituent was forced to stay in that police cell for a number of days—I cannot remember how many, but clearly too many—while his condition worsened. It was highly inappropriate and he plainly should have been removed to a hospital as soon as possible, so that he could start receiving the medical care denied him for some while.