National survey of psychiatrists’ responses to implementation of the Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland

The Impact of Changes in Mental Health Legislation on Psychiatry Trainee Stress in Victoria, Australia

In Victoria, Australia, the introduction of a new state Mental Health Act (MHA) in 2014 resulted in changes to the workload and type of work undertaken by trainee psychiatrists. In addition to long working hours, workload intensity is most often cited by trainees as a factor that leads to fatigue, with trainees often taking work home or doing overtime in order to fulfill work responsibilities and satisfy training requirements. This administrative burden is compounded by the high emotional burden associated with the practice of psychiatry, including patient suicides, aggression, and threats. This study aimed to explore the impact of these legislative changes on psychiatry trainees' stress and well-being, using a qualitative research methodology involving semi-structured interviews. Despite reporting that the length and number of reports they were preparing under the new MHA had increased, as had the amount of time spent at Tribunal hearings, psychiatry trainees were understanding of the necessity of MHA changes in improving patient rights. The trainees did not express a desire for the MHA changes to be reversed, but rather recognition by their workplaces that changes are also needed at a ground level-such as an increase in staff numbers-to accommodate for these. While mental health legislative changes are designed to improve the system and better protect patient rights, measures must also be taken to ensure that any policy-level changes are adequately adjusted for in hospital staffing levels.

The mental health detention process: a scoping review to inform GP training

BACKGROUND

GPs are often faced with deciding whether or not a patient may require detention for assessment in hospital under mental health legislation. This can be a complex and daunting process. Despite this, GPs and most other professionals receive limited formal training.

AIM

To map and review the current literature on training in mental health detention processes. These insights are vital to inform the further development of meaningful educational approaches.

DESIGN & SETTING

A systematic scoping literature review was conducted to identify what is known about how best to develop training in this area.

METHOD

Arksey and O'Malley's framework was used to select, chart, and analyse articles from across six electronic databases. A total of 1136 articles were included in the initial screening phase and 183 articles were included in the full-text screening phase. Key themes were derived using an iterative and thematic approach. A personal and public involvement (PPI) group was set up for this project and other stakeholders in the mental health detention process were consulted about the findings.

RESULTS

Fifty-two articles were included in the final review. Professionals consistently highlighted unmet training needs and difficulties with the process. There were identified needs for practical, interdisciplinary training, including discussion of complex cases, and opportunities to learn from those with direct experience.

CONCLUSION

This work is foundational for the development of meaningful educational approaches around mental health detention processes. A strong research base will inform and strengthen training with the ultimate aim of improving patient care.

Stakeholders' perspective on mental health laws in Pakistan: A mixed method study

The present study explored awareness and opinions pertaining to mental health legislation in Pakistan in the context of the United Nation Convention on Rights of People with Disabilities (UNCRPD) through a mixed method research design. In the quantitative arm of the study, a structured questionnaire examined awareness and opinions of key stakeholders pertaining to national mental health legislation. In the qualitative arm, face-to-face interviews further elaborated stakeholders perspectives pertaining to these topics with thematic analysis conducted. Stakeholders demonstrated a good awareness of legislation pertaining to guardianship (83.0 %) appointment of property managers (89.7%) and salary or pension entitlements (89.2%). Compared to other stakeholders, patients had less understanding of processes pertaining to involuntary admission (χ² = 20.54, p = 0.02) and appointing a guardian (χ² = 34.67, p < 0.01). High consensus across stakeholders was noted for processes of involuntary detention (83.5%) and appointment of guardians or property managers (80.0%) albeit patients demonstrated less agreement on these topics (p <0.01). Minimal support was noted for an involuntary patient to be discharged solely on a psychiatrist's recommendation (25.4%). Thematic analysis indicated fifteen emergent themes: 1) Alienation/ Seclusion; 2) Capacity building; 3) Communication Gap; 4) Conflict of interests; 5) Discomfort at hospital; 6) Economic burden; 7) Government's liability; 8) Family involvement; 9) Imbalance; 10) Acceptance of Legal Incapacity; 11) Legal reforms; 12) Patient centred environment; 13) Quality assurance; 14) Under developed infrastructure and 15) Potential unethical practices. This study advocates for increased patient involvement in collaborative decision making with mental health professionals and the creation of more appropriate inpatient treatment environments.

Are mental health tribunals operating in accordance with international human rights standards? A systematic review of the international literature

Mental health tribunals are responsible for making decisions about compulsory treatment for individuals considered a risk to themselves and others due to mental disorder. They are generally designed to provide safeguards for individuals subject to compulsory treatment by testing whether national legislative criteria and international human rights standards have been met. Despite this, they have been criticised for being dominated by the medical domain, focusing rigidly on legal criteria and for restricting human rights, including the rights to liberty and access to justice. As a result, questions have arisen over the extent to which mental health tribunals are indeed operating in line with their legislative intentions and international human rights requirements. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise international evidence on this and to assess the extent to which this is reflected in such literature. A systematic search of the literature was conducted on the 17 April 2018 for articles published between 2000 and 2018 in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, ASSIA and Web of Science. All study designs were included within this review, provided they reported empirical findings. Thirty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. Eight themes were identified across the literature and these were participation, information and understanding, patient representation, the power of the medical domain, feelings of powerlessness, perceptions of fairness, risk and the impact on relationships. The findings call into question whether mental health tribunals necessarily operate in compliance with international human rights standards. This article suggests that mental health tribunals may need to do more to safeguard legislative principles and human rights standards that promote patient autonomy.

A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

To describe similarities and differences in mental health legislation between five jurisdictions: the Republic of Ireland, England and Wales, Scotland, Ontario (Canada), and Victoria (Australia).

METHODS

An in-depth examination was undertaken focussing on the process of involuntary admission, review of Admission Orders and the legal processes in relation to treatment in the absence of patient consent in each of the five jurisdictions of interest.

RESULTS

All jurisdictions permit the detention of a patient if they have a mental disorder although the definition of mental disorder varies between jurisdictions. Several additional differences exist between the five jurisdictions, including the duration of admission prior to independent review of involuntary detention and the role of supported decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

Across the five jurisdictions examined, largely similar procedures for admission, detention and treatment of involuntary patients are employed, reflecting adherence with international standards and incorporation of human rights-based principles. Differences exist in relation to the criteria to define mental disorder, the occurrence of automatic review hearings in a timely fashion after a patient is involuntarily admitted and the role for supported decision making under mental health legislation.

Irish Mental Health Act 2001: impact on involuntary admissions in a community mental health service in Dublin

Aims and method

On 1 November 2006, Ireland's Mental Health Act 2001 was implemented, replacing the country's Mental Treatment Act 1945. We aimed to assess the impact of this change in legislation on the number and duration of involuntary admissions. We undertook a retrospective review of all admissions to a psychiatric admissions unit from January to October 2006 (pre-implementation) and January to October 2007 (post-implementation).

Results

There were 46 involuntary admissions in the 10-month period under study in 2006, or 33.8 per 100 000 population. There were 53 in 2007, or 39.3 per 100 000 population. This increase was not significant (z = – 0.7, P = 0.46), however involuntary admissions formed a larger proportion of all admissions under the Mental Health Act 2001 than under the Mental Treatment Act 1945 (χ2 = 4.2, P =0.04). There was no difference in the duration of involuntary admissions but under the 2001 Act, involuntary patients had longer periods of voluntary status as part of their admissions than under the 1945 Act.

Clinical implications

The introduction of more rigorous procedures for involuntary admission did not significantly change the rate or duration of involuntary admissions in our centre. The finding that involuntary admissions included longer periods of voluntary status suggests that more care is being taken to revoke involuntary admission orders under the Mental Health Act 2001 than under the Mental Treatment Act 1945.

Qualitative exploration of stakeholders' perspectives of involuntary admission under the Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland

There is international interest in, and continued concern about, the potential long-term impact of involuntary admission to psychiatric institutions, and the effect this coercive action has on a person's well-being and human rights. Involuntary detention in hospital remains a controversial process that involves stakeholders with competing concerns and who often describe negative experiences of the process, which can have long-lasting effects on the therapeutic relationship with service users. The aim of the present study was to explore the perspectives of key stakeholders involved in the involuntary admission and detention of people under the Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland. Focus groups were used to collect data. Stakeholders interviewed were service users, relatives, general practitioners, psychiatrists, mental health nurses, solicitors, tribunal members, and police. Data were analysed using a general inductive approach. Three key categories emerged: (i) getting help; (ii) detention under the Act; and (iii) experiences of the tribunal process. This research highlights gaps in information and uncertainty about the involuntary admission process for stakeholders, but particularly for service users who are most affected by inadequate processes and supports. Mental health law has traditionally focussed on narrower areas of detention and treatment, but human rights law requires a greater refocussing on supporting service users to ensure a truly voluntary approach to care. The recent human rights treaty, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, is to guarantee a broad range of fundamental rights, such as liberty and integrity, which can be affected by coercive processes of involuntary admission and treatment.

Service users' experiences of mental health tribunals in Ireland: a qualitative analysis

OBJECTIVES

To explore the mental health tribunal experiences of people admitted involuntarily under the Mental Health Act 2001.

METHODS

Employing a qualitative descriptive study design, data were collected from 23 service users who had experienced mental health tribunals during a recent involuntary admission. Face-to-face semi-structured interviews were conducted ~3 months post-revocation of their involuntary admission order. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic process.

RESULTS

The majority of participants reported mixed experiences comprising positive and negative aspects in relation to information provision, emotional support and an inclusive atmosphere. Some participants reported receiving accessible information about the tribunal process, felt emotionally supported throughout, and encountered respectful and dignifying practices during the tribunal proceedings. However, many participants described experiencing non-inclusive practices, reported feeling ill-informed regarding the tribunal process, emotionally unsupported during and after the tribunal, and distressed by what they perceived as adversarial tribunal proceedings.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic changes could ensure that the positive experiences encountered by the minority of participants in this study are more consistently experienced. Ongoing education and training of stakeholders in the provision of inclusive tribunal practices, and the provision of accessible information and emotional support to service users through the stages of the involuntary admission process appear likely to be beneficial. Service users should automatically be offered the option of having a support person of their choosing present during tribunals.

Exploring and explaining involuntary care: The relationship between psychiatric admission status, gender and other demographic and clinical variables

Involuntary admission and treatment are features of psychiatric care in many countries, but the relationship between involuntary status and gender (among other factors) is not clear. We examined demographic and diagnostic factors associated with involuntary admission in a general adult psychiatry service in a deprived area of Dublin's north inner-city over a 7-year period (2008 to 2014 inclusive). Over this period, there were 1099 admissions, yielding an annual admission rate of 504.8 admissions per 100,000 population per year. When adjusted for deprivation, this rate (387.7) was lower than the national rate (413.9). Consistent with other inner-city areas in Dublin, 14.1% of admissions were involuntary, yielding an involuntary admission rate of 71.2 per 100,000 population per year (deprivation-adjusted rate: 54.8), which is higher than the national rate (39.4). After controlling for age, occupation, marital status and diagnosis, the only independent predictors of admission status were place of origin (p<0.001) and male gender (p=0.001). These findings are consistent with studies showing associations between male gender and involuntary status in the United States, New Zealand, Netherlands, Norway, Belgium, France, and Luxembourg. In contrast, female gender is associated with involuntary status in Switzerland, Brazil, and China. These cross-national differences are likely related to differing legal traditions and different criteria for involuntary admission, possibly related to varying emphases placed on "dangerousness" as a mandatory criterion for involuntary hospitalization. This merits further, cross-national study.

Opinions of key stakeholders concerning involuntary admission of patients under the Mental Health Act 2001

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate and compare the opinions of key stakeholders involved in the involuntary admission and treatment of patients under the Mental Health Act (MHA) 2001 regarding their views towards the operation of the legislation.

METHODS

We employed a descriptive survey design. A questionnaire was distributed to stakeholders involved in the operation of the MHA 2001 (except service users, whose views were explored in a separate qualitative study) via paper or online versions evaluating their opinions regarding the operation of the MHA 2001 in relation to assessment, care, rights, transfer and information available.

RESULTS

Stakeholders agreed that in their opinion that patients generally benefit from the care they receive (79%) and that the MHA 2001 ensures an independent and fair review of the person's detention (65%). However, only 23% of stakeholders were satisfied with the process of transferring patients to hospital and with the clinical assessment procedures therein (37%), with the greatest levels of dissatisfaction amongst Gardai (Police), general practitioners (GPs) and family members.

CONCLUSIONS

While the introduction of the MHA 2001 has assisted delivery of care to patients with improved adherence to international human rights frameworks applicable at the time of its enactment, substantial dissatisfaction with the implementation of the MHA 2001 in practice is experienced by stakeholders particularly at the distressing phase of clinical assessment and transfer to hospital.

Mental health law profile on the Republic of Ireland

This article provides a brief overview of the legislation that has been enacted in Ireland with respect to mental health, in particular the 2001 Mental Health Act. Although that Act was a positive step towards developing an Irish mental health service that protects the human rights of service users, a number of concerns remain, including issues related to consent and capacity, involuntary out-patient treatment and admission, the adversarial nature and timing of tribunals, and the lack of safeguards for voluntary patients.

Custody, care and country of origin: demographic and diagnostic admission statistics at an inner-city adult psychiatry unit

Involuntary detention is a feature of psychiatric care in many countries. We previously reported an involuntary admission rate of 67.7 per 100,000 population per year in inner-city Dublin (January 2008-December 2010), which was higher than Ireland's national rate (38.5). We also found that the proportion of admissions that was involuntary was higher among individuals born outside Ireland (33.9%) compared to those from Ireland (12.0%), apparently owing to increased diagnoses of schizophrenia in the former group. In the present study (January 2011-June 2013) we again found that the proportion of admissions that was involuntary was higher among individuals from outside Ireland (32.5%) compared to individuals from Ireland (9.9%) (p<0.001), but this is primarily attributable to a lower rate of voluntary admission among individuals born outside Ireland (206.1 voluntary admissions per 100,000 population per year; deprivation-adjusted rate: 158.5) compared to individuals from Ireland (775.1; deprivation-adjusted rate: 596.2). Overall, admission rates in our deprived, inner-city catchment area remain higher than national rates and this may be attributable to differential effects of Ireland's recent economic problems on different areas within Ireland. The relatively low rate of voluntary admission among individuals born outside Ireland may be attributable to different patterns of help-seeking which mental health services in Ireland need to take into account in future service-planning. Other jurisdictions could also usefully focus attention not just on rates on involuntary admission among individuals born elsewhere, but also rates of voluntary admission which may provide useful insights for service-planning and delivery.

Study of Presentations for Involuntary Admission to a Cork Approved Centre

Objectives: To describe the characteristics of patients who present to an approved centre with Mental Health Act 2001 forms, and secondly, to compare those who were subsequently detained to those who were not detained.

Methods: Specific data on patients who presented to South Lee Mental Health Unit with application and recommendation forms for Involuntary Admission over a 22 month period was gathered from a retrospective case note review. Information on both groups was compared statistically using Graph Pad Prism software.

Results: 71% (n=121) of patients presenting for involuntary admission did so outside of normal working hours. Those who were not subsequently detained were more likely to have had their application made by the Gardai and their recommendation made by someone other than their own General Practitioner (GP). GPs were more likely than Consultant Psychiatrists to cite risk to self or others as the reason for involuntary admission.

Conclusion: Although involuntary admissions most often occur in emergency situations, every effort should be made to ensure that those who are known to the patient are involved in the process of application and recommendation. In addition, there is a need for ongoing training and education of those most commonly involved, such as the Gardai and General Practitioners, as well as feedback to these groups when a patient presents who does not require involuntary admission.

Dignity, human rights and the limits of mental health legislation

A right is an entitlement that one may legally or morally claim. Human rights are of particular importance in mental health care owing to the existence of laws that permit involuntary admission and treatment under certain circumstances, and compelling evidence of persistent social exclusion of some individuals with mental disorder. Ireland’s mental health legislation, which is currently under review, meets most international human rights standards in areas of traditional concern (involuntary admission and treatment) but not in other areas (especially social and economic rights). These deficits would be addressed, at least in part, by replacing the principle of ‘best interests’ with the principle of ‘dignity’ as the over-arching principle in Irish mental health legislation. Such a change would help ensure that decisions made under the legislation actively facilitate individuals with mental disorder to exercise their capabilities, help promote human rights and protect dignity. Even following such a reform, however, it is neither practical nor realistic to expect mental health legislation alone to protect and promote all of the broader rights of individuals with mental disorder, especially social and economic rights. Some rights are better protected, and some needs better met, through social policy, mental health policy and broader societal awareness and reform.

Attitudes and experiences of nursing staff to the Mental Health Act 2001: lessons for future mental health legislation

Objectives

The Mental Health Act 2001 was implemented in 2006 to bring Ireland into line with international practice and United Nations Conventions on Human Rights. Previous studies have reported some practical difficulties for the professionals involved. We wished to examine the experiences of nursing staff and the impact of the Act on clinical nursing practice since its implementation.

Method

This cross-sectional survey was conducted by questionnaire. It contained questions examining training in and attitudes to the Act, and any resultant changes in nursing practise.

Results

A total of 317 questionnaires were returned. Of the nurses, 92% reported having received training in the Act, and 56% of nursing staff believed that their workload had increased as a result of the change in legislation. Of those who made a comment, 76.5% were negative, with increased paper work, lack of clarity and an excessive focus on legalities being the most common difficulties reported.

Conclusions

Nursing staff have shown mixed attitudes to the Mental Health Act 2001, but many of the difficulties encountered are similar to those experienced by other professionals.

Implementing the Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland: views of Irish general practitioners

OBJECTIVES

The Mental Health Act 2001 introduced important reforms of Irish mental health law and services. This paper aims to provide an evidence-based exploration of general practitioners' views on the implementation of the Mental Health Act 2001.

METHODS

We posted questionnaires to 1200 general practitioners in Ireland seeking their views on their experiences with the Mental Health Act 2001.

RESULTS

Eight hundred and twenty general practitioners (68.3%) responded. Among those who provided comments, a majority (75.2%) provided negative comments. The most commonly occurring themes related to difficulties with transport of patients to inpatient facilities, form filling, time requirements and administrative matters. Other negative comments related to general practitioner recommendations for involuntary admission, training, mental health tribunals, applications for involuntary admission and the position of children. Minorities provided neutral (18.0%) or positive comments (6.8%), chiefly related to user-friendliness, transparency and improved communication.

CONCLUSIONS

General practitioners highlight a need for greater training and clear guidelines in relation to the Mental Health Act 2001. Their forthright responses demonstrate deep engagement with the new legislation and eagerness to see the Mental Health Act 2001 realise its full potential to improve the involuntary admission process and protect human rights, in the best interests of patients.

Five years after implementation: a review of the Irish Mental Health Act 2001

OBJECTIVES

The Mental Health Act 2001 (MHA 2001) was implemented in November 2006. Since that time, there has been considerable research into its impact, including the impact on service provision, use of coercive practices and the perceptions by key stakeholders. Our objective is to present a summary of research into the MHA 2001 since its implementation in the Irish state in the context of international standards and practice.

METHODS

We reviewed the literature presented on Medline and Google Scholar, directly assessed relevant journals and sought abstract information from the College of Psychiatry of Ireland.

RESULTS

There has been a small decrease in the rate of involuntary admission since implementation but there has been no change in the representativeness of diagnoses of individuals admitted involuntarily. Mental Health Tribunals were held for 57% of those admitted involuntarily and 46% of service users found that the Mental Health Tribunal made the involuntary admission easier to accept. One year after discharge, 60% of service users reflected that their involuntary admission had been necessary. Professional groups have expressed concerns regarding workload, training time for junior doctors and paperwork.

CONCLUSIONS

The MHA 2001 has brought the practice of involuntary admission further into line with international standards. However, five years after the implementation of the Act international guidelines and practice have highlighted areas in need of further reform, including capacity legislation and consideration of advance directives and community treatment orders. Further research is also lacking on caregivers' or family members' perceptions of the MHA 2001.

Voluntary and involuntary care: three-year study of demographic and diagnostic admission statistics at an inner-city adult psychiatry unit

Individuals with mental disorders can, under specific circumstances, be detained and treated against their wishes. In 2009, there were 1633 involuntary admissions in Ireland, accounting for 8.1% of all psychiatric admissions. We examined demographic and diagnostic factors associated with involuntary admission in a general adult psychiatry service in Dublin's north inner-city over a retrospective three-year period. The overall admission rate was 450.5 admissions per 100,000 population per year (deprivation-adjusted rate: 345.7), which is lower than the national rate (476.3). The involuntary admission rate was 67.7 (deprivation-adjusted rate: 51.9), which is higher than the national rate (38.5). Fifteen per cent of admissions were involuntary (for all or part of the admission), which is higher than the national proportion (8.1%) but the same as that reported in another inner-city psychiatry service (15.7%). The proportion of admissions that was involuntary was higher amongst individuals from outside Ireland (33.9%) compared to those from Ireland (12.0%) (p<0.001). Country of origin was, however, related to diagnosis: 53.2% of admissions of individuals from outside Ireland were with schizophrenia, compared to 18.5% of admissions of individuals from Ireland (p<0.001). Diagnosis was, in turn, related to admission status: 37.5% of admissions with schizophrenia were involuntary compared to 15% overall (p<0.001). On multi-variable testing, diagnosis was the only independent predictor of admission status (p=0.01) (R(2)=35.2%); country of origin was not an independent predictor of admission status. Deprivation accounts for part, but not all, of the high rate of involuntary admission in Dublin's inner-city. Diagnosis accounts for one third of the variance in admission status between individuals. Further study is required to determine what factors account for the remaining two thirds (e.g. symptoms, insight) and to clarify better the relationships between admission status, diagnosis and country of origin. There is a strong need for enhanced focus on the mental health needs of individuals from outside of Ireland, especially in Dublin's north inner-city.

Implementing the Mental Health Act 2007 in British general practice: Lessons from Ireland

Changes in mental health legislation (e.g. Mental Health Act 2007 in England and Wales, Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland) have generally improved adherence to international human rights standards, but also present challenges to primary care providers. When mental health legislation was substantially reformed in Ireland, 62.9% of general practitioners (GPs) felt the new legislation was not user-friendly. Majorities of GPs who felt the legislation affected their practice reported increased workloads (85%) and various other difficulties (53%). GPs who had received training about the legislation were more likely to find it user-friendly (43% versus 30.9%), and informal training (e.g. from colleagues) was just as likely as formal training to be associated with a GP finding it user-friendly. With similar changes to mental health legislation being introduced in England and Wales, it is significant that informal training is just as good as formal training in helping GPs work with new mental health legislation.