Recommendations & Conclusions
5 items
2
Recommendation
3rd Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Ment…
Accepted in Part
We urge the Government to support the retention of this amendment as the Bill progresses through the House of Commons. (Recommendation, Paragraph 14)
Government response AI summary
The government accepts the recommendation in part, committing to monitor and publish data on the number of detentions of people with a learning disability and autistic people under the Mental Capacity Act, as part of their standard publications.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
17
Conclusion
3rd Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Ment…
Accepted in Part
We agree with witnesses that children under 16 may be denied the opportunity to benefit from the rights provided by the Bill if their ability to make decisions for themselves is not properly assessed. Clarity in such assessments is therefore important. (Conclusion, Paragraph 106)
Read more
We agree with witnesses that children under 16 may be denied the opportunity to benefit from the rights provided by the Bill if their ability to make decisions for themselves is not properly assessed. Clarity in such assessments is therefore important. (Conclusion, Paragraph 106)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects introducing a new statutory test for assessing competence in under-16s due to potential confusion, but commits to consulting on updating existing guidance in the MHA Code of Practice to improve the practical application of Gillick competence.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
20
Conclusion
3rd Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Ment…
Accepted in Part
We recognise that some of the changes proposed in the Bill could help to reduce racial inequity in the application of the Mental Health Act. We also recognise that the causes of differences of treatment and particularly outcomes between people of different races can be varied and complex, and that …
Read more
We recognise that some of the changes proposed in the Bill could help to reduce racial inequity in the application of the Mental Health Act. We also recognise that the causes of differences of treatment and particularly outcomes between people of different races can be varied and complex, and that addressing them may require wider systemic and societal change beyond the scope of this or any legislation. Nevertheless, we were surprised that the Mental Health Bill contains no measures directly addressing racial and ethnic inequalities in the application of the MHA and we agree with many witnesses that the Bill could go further. (Conclusion, Paragraph 123)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government acknowledges the need to tackle racial inequalities under the MHA, asserting the Equality Act and NHS PCREF provide the framework, and commits to consulting on updating the Code of Practice to include guidance on considering race, culture, and disability.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
25
Recommendation
3rd Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Ment…
Accepted in Part
The Mental Health Bill should be amended to ensure that the Human Rights Act, and the protection it provides, applies whenever people receive publicly funded mental health treatment or after–care, or are deprived of their liberty on mental health grounds. This protection should not depend on whether or not the …
Read more
The Mental Health Bill should be amended to ensure that the Human Rights Act, and the protection it provides, applies whenever people receive publicly funded mental health treatment or after–care, or are deprived of their liberty on mental health grounds. This protection should not depend on whether or not the provider itself is public or private. The Government should also consider carrying out a wider review of the scope of the terms “public authority” and “functions of a public nature” in section 6 HRA to address any other similar and unjustified human rights protection gaps that may exist. (Recommendation, Paragraph 137)
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government agrees to remedy the issue and has tabled an amendment to the Mental Health Bill to ensure the Human Rights Act applies to publicly funded inpatient care and Section 117 after-care provided by private providers. They acknowledge ongoing questions about the wider scope …
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice
29
Recommendation
3rd Report - Legislative Scrutiny: Ment…
Accepted in Part
The Bill should be amended to ensure that conditions depriving a restricted patient of their liberty are reviewed by the Mental Health Tribunal promptly and regularly In particular, the Secretary of State should refer the restricted patient’s case to the tribunal after 6 months (unless the case has already been …
Read more
The Bill should be amended to ensure that conditions depriving a restricted patient of their liberty are reviewed by the Mental Health Tribunal promptly and regularly In particular, the Secretary of State should refer the restricted patient’s case to the tribunal after 6 months (unless the case has already been considered) and every restricted patient subject to deprivation of liberty conditions should have their case reviewed every 12 months. 57 A proposed amendment to achieve this is set out in the Appendix. The Government must also ensure that full and detailed guidance is issued on the use of conditions that amount to a deprivation of liberty. (Recommendation, Paragraph 156) 58
Show less
Government response AI summary
The government rejects the specific recommendation for restricted patient cases to be referred to the Mental Health Tribunal after 6 months and reviewed every 12 months, but fully accepts and details plans to issue full and detailed guidance on deprivation of liberty conditions.
Read full response →
Ministry of Justice