Proceeding contribution from Baroness Murphy (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Monday, 15 January 2007. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Mental Health Bill [HL].
Mental Health Bill [HL]
I thank the Minister for that careful response. There has been a creeping increase in the use of Section 3 admissions since 1999, which many people—including the Mental Health Alliance and the college—are not convinced is in patients’ best long-term interest. I am a little worried that not allowing double access to the tribunal may be a cost-cutting exercise, because of the state of turmoil that the tribunal has been in over the past few years. That may be an added deterrent for the Government from having any further tribunals right now. I am not very sympathetic to that, but nevertheless I will consider the Minister’s response further. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 6 agreed to.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 688 c454
- Session
- 2006-07
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Children Codes of practice Admissions Consent to medical treatment Compulsorily detained psychiatric patients Diagnosis Food Electroconvulsive therapy Mental illness Medical treatments Patients' rights Mental health services Mental health Psychiatric hospitals Standards Young people Safety Testing
- Legislation
- Mental Health Bill (HL) 2006-07
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 12:23:31 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369441
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369441
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_369441