Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many times the Court of Protection has asked NHS bodies for reports under Section 49 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 in each of the last five years.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
When deciding the circumstances in some cases, section 49 reports are essential to ensure that the Court of Protection has all the necessary information to enable a decision to be made about an individual’s wishes and needs. During a hearing , the court may request further information including from social workers and clinicians in the form of a section 49 report. The Department has not issued any guidance on the use of section 49 by the independent judiciary but Practice Direction 14E, issued by the Court of Protection, provides detail on how to respond to requests for section 49 reports.
No data is collected on either the number of requests to NHS bodies for section 49 reports or on which NHS bodies have been requested to provide reports.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what guidance his Department has issued to the Court of Protection on the use of Section 49 of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 to ensure that (a) NHS bodies are not disproportionately affected and (b) clinicians are not called away from front-line services at short notice.
Answered by Edward Argar - Minister of State (Ministry of Justice)
When deciding the circumstances in some cases, section 49 reports are essential to ensure that the Court of Protection has all the necessary information to enable a decision to be made about an individual’s wishes and needs. During a hearing , the court may request further information including from social workers and clinicians in the form of a section 49 report. The Department has not issued any guidance on the use of section 49 by the independent judiciary but Practice Direction 14E, issued by the Court of Protection, provides detail on how to respond to requests for section 49 reports.
No data is collected on either the number of requests to NHS bodies for section 49 reports or on which NHS bodies have been requested to provide reports.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what proportion of patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 have been discharged from detention following a First-Tier Mental Health Tribunal (a) paper and (b) oral hearing in each of the last five years for which data is available.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
The First-Tier Mental Health Tribunal does not centrally record the outcomes of tribunal hearings broken down by whether the case was considered on paper or at an oral hearing. Therefore, this information could only be obtained at disproportionate cost. However, in 2017/18 cases considered on paper composed 2.5% of all hearings in the tribunal.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, whether he has consulted people detained under the Mental Health Act 1983 on proposals by the Tribunal Procedure Committee to give First-Tier Mental Health Tribunals the power to take decisions without an oral hearing where a patient has been automatically referred to a tribunal.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
When the Tribunal Procedure Committee published the consultation, it was sent to key mental health organisations including MIND, Rethink, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Mental Health Foundation and Mental Health UK so they could consider the proposals and reflect the experience of those detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
The Ministry of Justice has not carried out such an assessment of the Committee’s proposal to abolish pre-hearing examinations but awaits the outcome of the consultation. If the Committee decides to make any changes to the rules, the Lord Chancellor will consider the potential impact of those changes before deciding whether to allow the proposed changes to be implemented.
Asked by: Barbara Keeley (Labour - Worsley and Eccles South)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential effect of proposals by the Tribunal Procedure Committee to abolish pre-hearing examinations in the First-Tier Mental Health Tribunal on the United Kingdom’s compliance with Article 5 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Answered by Lucy Frazer - Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport
When the Tribunal Procedure Committee published the consultation, it was sent to key mental health organisations including MIND, Rethink, the Royal College of Psychiatrists, Mental Health Foundation and Mental Health UK so they could consider the proposals and reflect the experience of those detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
The Ministry of Justice has not carried out such an assessment of the Committee’s proposal to abolish pre-hearing examinations but awaits the outcome of the consultation. If the Committee decides to make any changes to the rules, the Lord Chancellor will consider the potential impact of those changes before deciding whether to allow the proposed changes to be implemented.