My Lords, I am very disappointed overall. Although I have moved a long way personally in my response to the Government's proposals—I no longer oppose them fully—we do not even have agreement to the constraints that would restrict community treatment orders to the very group that the Government have said they want to be subject to the orders. I remain very concerned that a young person who has a first breakdown—20 per cent will never have a relapse—may be placed on an order, come into hospital and remain on an order at intermittent review, without ever having had the opportunity to demonstrate their non-compliance with the medication.
At the very minimum, we should have some restriction that enables that person to demonstrate that they can build a relationship and become engaged in treatment. As the legislation stands, that may not be possible. What signal does that send to young people in the community, the very ones whom we want to encourage into treatment at the first symptoms of their illness? I strongly support the amendments to constrain the orders and still believe that we would catch under the order the very people whom we would like to engage in treatment for longer.
Mental Health Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Murphy
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 26 February 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Mental Health Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
689 c1409-10 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:20:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379549
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379549
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_379549