Asked by: Baroness Maclean of Redditch (Conservative - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask His Majesty's Government what safeguards are in place to prevent the risk of self-diagnosed mental health conditions, such as anxiety and depression, leading to a rise in sickness benefit claims.
Answered by Baroness Sherlock - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Entitlement to health and disability benefits is determined by the eligibility criteria for the respective benefits. Each case is assessed individually based on the evidence provided.
We have also launched the Timms Review to ensure Personal Independence Payment (PIP) is fair and fit for the future. It is the ever first full review of PIP and will include consideration of whether the assessment effectively captures the impact of long-term health conditions and disability in the modern world.
Asked by: David Baines (Labour - St Helens North)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what assessment his Department has made of the availability of diagnostic and treatment pathways for Tourette syndrome across Integrated Care Boards; and for what reason Tourette syndrome has not been included in the scope of the Independent Review into mental health conditions
Answered by Ashley Dalton - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
Integrated care boards (ICBs) are responsible for assessing local population need and commissioning appropriate diagnostic and treatment pathways for neurological conditions, including Tourette syndrome. While the Department has not undertaken a national assessment of provision across ICBs, we recognise the concerns raised about variation in diagnosis and support. To help address this, NHS England’s Getting It Right First Time (GIRFT) programme is working with ICBs to develop clear, consistent diagnostic and treatment pathways. The programme has appointed a clinical lead for children and young people's neurodevelopmental services, focusing on improving the assessment and management of Tourette syndrome.
The Independent Review into mental health conditions focuses on mental health conditions, ADHD and autism. Tourette’s is a neurological disorder and, therefore, it will be at the chair's discretion as to how far the review considers Tourette syndrome.
Asked by: Al Pinkerton (Liberal Democrat - Surrey Heath)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment her Department has made of the potential impact of social media on young people’s wellbeing in (a) Surrey and (b) Surrey Heath constituency.
Answered by Kanishka Narayan - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The Online Safety Act requires services to protect children in the UK, including Surrey and Surrey Heath, from illegal and harmful content online. But we know that up and down the country, parents are grappling with how much screentime their children should have and the consequences on their mental health.
The government is determined to give children the childhood they deserve and enhance their wellbeing. That is why we are launching a consultation to gather evidence to understand how best we can build on the Online Safety Act’s provisions to ensure children have positive, enriched digital lives.
The consultation will be accompanied by a national conversation, and we want to hear from children and parents right across the UK. Every voice matters in shaping what comes next.
Asked by: Cat Smith (Labour - Lancaster and Wyre)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, on what dates his Department has met with patient groups representing families affected by sodium valproate since January 2024.
Answered by Zubir Ahmed - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department of Health and Social Care)
The current Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Women's Health and Mental Health, Baroness Merron, the previous minister with responsibility for sodium valproate and pelvic mesh redress policy, held a roundtable with representatives of the sodium valproate patient groups in December 2024.
Since then, I met with relevant stakeholders at various parliamentary events. I also met with the Patient Safety Commissioner in December 2025, to discuss progress following the Hughes Report and have made clear the Department’s expectation of continued, proactive engagement with the Patient Safety Commissioner and key stakeholders.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the compensation proposals for the estates of infected individuals who died before the establishment of Infected Blood Support Schemes in 2017; and whether those estates will have equivalent routes to seek recognition of injuries, including psychological injury, to those available to estates whose claims were taken over by the schemes.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive compensation under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, regardless of whether the infected person was registered with the Infected Blood Support Schemes (IBSS) at any time. Whether an infected person was registered with the IBSS at the time of their death has no bearing on the calculation of their compensation package and they are compensated under the same awards (Injury, Social Impact, Autonomy, Financial Loss and Care) as an infected person who was registered with the IBSS.
The majority of victims of the infected blood scandal have suffered psychological harm. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme currently provides compensation for psychological harm through both the core and supplementary route, depending on the type and severity of harm. In the supplementary route, the Severe Health Condition award offers additional compensation where someone has been diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder that has caused suffering beyond what is recognised and compensated for as part of their core award. The estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive both of these awards.
The Government has consulted on a proposal that severe mental health issues not covered in the core route are compensated for by the expansion of eligibility for a Severe Health Condition award because they meet the criteria for the Special Category Mechanism (SCM) or equivalent payments. The Government has not proposed that estates of deceased infected people who were not receiving SCM or equivalent payments at the time of death are eligible to receive this award, as the infected person is not able to be assessed by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority against the same criteria. The Government is carefully considering all consultation responses, and will publish its response within 12 weeks of the consultation’s closing date.
Asked by: Andrew George (Liberal Democrat - St Ives)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, whether he will set out the evidential routes through which the estates of deceased infected individuals will be able to seek compensation for psychological injuries experienced before death, including in cases involving significant mental health deterioration or attempted suicide.
Answered by Nick Thomas-Symonds - Paymaster General and Minister for the Cabinet Office
Estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive compensation under the Infected Blood Compensation Scheme, regardless of whether the infected person was registered with the Infected Blood Support Schemes (IBSS) at any time. Whether an infected person was registered with the IBSS at the time of their death has no bearing on the calculation of their compensation package and they are compensated under the same awards (Injury, Social Impact, Autonomy, Financial Loss and Care) as an infected person who was registered with the IBSS.
The majority of victims of the infected blood scandal have suffered psychological harm. The Infected Blood Compensation Scheme currently provides compensation for psychological harm through both the core and supplementary route, depending on the type and severity of harm. In the supplementary route, the Severe Health Condition award offers additional compensation where someone has been diagnosed with a severe psychiatric disorder that has caused suffering beyond what is recognised and compensated for as part of their core award. The estates of deceased infected people are eligible to receive both of these awards.
The Government has consulted on a proposal that severe mental health issues not covered in the core route are compensated for by the expansion of eligibility for a Severe Health Condition award because they meet the criteria for the Special Category Mechanism (SCM) or equivalent payments. The Government has not proposed that estates of deceased infected people who were not receiving SCM or equivalent payments at the time of death are eligible to receive this award, as the infected person is not able to be assessed by the Infected Blood Compensation Authority against the same criteria. The Government is carefully considering all consultation responses, and will publish its response within 12 weeks of the consultation’s closing date.
Asked by: Zöe Franklin (Liberal Democrat - Guildford)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of trends in the level of use of Community Protection Warnings in cases involving people experiencing a mental health crisis; and what guidance exists on the use of those powers.
Answered by Sarah Jones - Minister of State (Home Office)
The Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act, 2014 (‘the 2014 Act’) provides the police, local authorities and other local agencies with a range of tools and powers that they can use to respond to anti-social behaviour. This includes Community Protection Warnings and Notices which can be used to stop a person aged 16 or over, business or organisation committing anti-social behaviour which spoils the community’s quality of life.
While the details of how the powers are used in individual cases are an operational matter, the Home Office provides statutory guidance to support local agencies in the use of the powers and tools in the 2014 Act. The guidance highlights the importance of considering the needs and circumstances of vulnerable perpetrators when applying the powers.
The Home Office does not currently collect data on the reasons why the ASB powers were issued.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, how many mental capacity assessments have been carried out on patients in each of the last five years.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) is designed to protect and empower people who lack the mental capacity to make a decision themselves. It says that every person must be presumed to have capacity to make the decision in question unless it is established otherwise, and sets out a two-stage test to establish if a person can make specific decisions regarding their care and treatment. Capacity assessments are done locally, and data is not collated or held centrally on how many assessments are carried out.
The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) is a procedure prescribed in law under the MCA when a person who lacks mental capacity to consent to their care or treatment is being deprived of their liberty in a care home or hospital in order to keep them safe from harm. DoLS assessments data is collated and published, the most recent data available is for 2023/24.
In 2023/24 there were 323,870 DoLS applications completed, 145,945 fully assessed, 15,270 closed partially assessed, 162,655 closed without assessments, and 123,790 not completed at year end.
The MCA code of practice gives guidance to people who work with, or care for, people who can’t make decisions for themselves, including when a mental capacity assessment should be carried out, and by whom. Government is clear that professionals applying the MCA are expected to keep up to date with guidance and caselaw, and to correctly use the principles within the act.
In October 2025 we announced our intention to run a joint consultation with the Ministry of Justice to consult on Liberty Protection Safeguards and an updated draft of the Code of Practice in 2026.
Asked by: Jim Shannon (Democratic Unionist Party - Strangford)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what guidance his Department provides on when a mental capacity review should be carried out on a patient.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) is designed to protect and empower people who lack the mental capacity to make a decision themselves. It says that every person must be presumed to have capacity to make the decision in question unless it is established otherwise, and sets out a two-stage test to establish if a person can make specific decisions regarding their care and treatment. Capacity assessments are done locally, and data is not collated or held centrally on how many assessments are carried out.
The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) is a procedure prescribed in law under the MCA when a person who lacks mental capacity to consent to their care or treatment is being deprived of their liberty in a care home or hospital in order to keep them safe from harm. DoLS assessments data is collated and published, the most recent data available is for 2023/24.
In 2023/24 there were 323,870 DoLS applications completed, 145,945 fully assessed, 15,270 closed partially assessed, 162,655 closed without assessments, and 123,790 not completed at year end.
The MCA code of practice gives guidance to people who work with, or care for, people who can’t make decisions for themselves, including when a mental capacity assessment should be carried out, and by whom. Government is clear that professionals applying the MCA are expected to keep up to date with guidance and caselaw, and to correctly use the principles within the act.
In October 2025 we announced our intention to run a joint consultation with the Ministry of Justice to consult on Liberty Protection Safeguards and an updated draft of the Code of Practice in 2026.
Asked by: James MacCleary (Liberal Democrat - Lewes)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, how many service personnel received a pre-discharge mental health assessment in each year since 2015.
Answered by Louise Sandher-Jones - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Defence)
All personnel being discharged from the Armed Forces should receive a Structured Mental Health Assessment (SMHA). The primary intent of the SMHA is to identify any unmet or unaddressed mental health needs prior to discharge.
The following table provides the numbers of UK Armed Forces personnel provided with a SMHA within 120 days of their release medical, by year from 1 January 2015 - 30 September 2025.
Year | SMHA Completed |
2015 | 8,145 |
2016 | 8,661 |
2017 | 9,820 |
2018 | 10,509 |
2019 | 10,442 |
2020 | 6,525 |
2021 | 7,546 |
2022 | 9,734 |
2023 | 10.675 |
2024 | 10,275 |
2025* | 6,911 |
* The number of SMHAs that took place between 1 January 2025 and 30 September 2025 to allow for a 120 day follow up period for completion.
Armed Forces personnel being discharged from service who are already under the care of specialist mental health services should have an SMHA completed, however, in some cases this may not be necessary where the individual’s needs are already being met through those specialist services.