5 Compulsory measures
5.1 We did not follow the exact format of the Millan Committee's paper in our questionnaire. We considered a number of questions, including people's views on compulsory treatment in the community. On the more complex technical matters (e.g. questions re time limits, and arrangements for appeal), there was greater uncertainty in the responses we received.
5.2 We asked informal carers and service users if they, or the person they support, had ever been detained under the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. Of 159 carers and users who answered this question, 63% (65% of carers, and 55% of service users) had this experience. The majority of most recent detentions had been since 1995.
5.3 We are aware that the police sometimes become involved when people in the community are being detained under the Act, and were interested to know how the carer and service user respondents had experienced this. We asked them if the police had ever been involved in the detention process, and 59% (99 people) had been in this situation. When asked if police involvement had been helpful, unhelpful, or made no difference, 73% said they had found it helpful. 17% said that in their view it had made no difference, and only 7% said it had been unhelpful.
This is an interesting finding which would bear further examination, although the anonymity of the questionnaire responses means we are not in a position to find out if there were particular common features (e.g. geographical location of respondents) which could be identified.
5.4 We also asked respondents what they thought a 'place of safety' should be (as defined in the police powers of intervention in the current Act). The vast majority of people believed that this should be a psychiatric hospital; less than half were in favour of it being the A&E; Department of a general hospital. A slightly larger number thought a police station should be possible as a 'place of safety', but only if nothing else was available (e.g. in rural areas).
5.5 We asked all respondents if they thought existing time limits for detention are satisfactory. (Millan Committee paper para. 6) Of 187 respondents, 5 1 % though they were, and a further 30.5% were unsure.
5.6 Of 189 respondents, 42% thought that current arrangements for legal review/challenge are unsatisfactory. 43% were unsure.
5.7 We asked whether respondents though it should be possible 'for a person detained under a 72 hour section, or someone acting on his/her behalf, to require the detention to be reviewed in some way'. 38% of 191 respondents thought this should be possible, with 35% unsure.
5.8 We asked a series of questions about compulsory treatment in the community. Those answering were asked the questions given below. They had the option of replying 'Yes', 'No', 'Perhaps', or 'Unsure'. There was some uncertainty, which will be analysed in more detail in our second response. Below we have given the 'Yes' and 'No' responses to each question.
'Do you think that compulsory treatment in the community to prevent relapse/deterioration:
- is a good idea? Yes: 61% No: 13%
- would prevent people from relapsing? Yes: 45% No: 9%
- would require excessive compulsion? Yes: 21% No: 21%
- might stop people with a mental health problem from contacting mental health professionals? Yes: 29% No: 20%
- would mean people got help before they deteriorated? Yes: 51% No: 10%
- would mean that people from black and ethnic
minority groups could experience discrimination? Yes: 13% No: 33%
When we asked respondents where such treatment should be received in the event that such treatment orders were introduced, the single largest suggestion was 'in the service user's home', followed by 'local day hospital', 'GP surgery' and 'informal carer's home'.
Clearly, these responses, the majority of which came from carers and service users indicate the need for much more discussion on this matter. For example, although 48 % of service users thought compulsory treatment on the above basis was a good idea, 35% of them were concerned that this might stop service users making contact with professionals.
More will be said on this matter in our second response.