Society Must Care for Mental Health Sufferers, Not Make their Behaviour a Law and Order Question

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

The Mental Health Act 2007:
Society Must Care for Mental Health Sufferers, Not Make their Behaviour a Law and Order Question

The new Mental Health Act 2007 has been widely condemned by human rights and community groups, such as Mind, as reprehensible. Not only does the Act mean that service users will not have to be considered "treatable" to be detained in hospital, but the Act brings in draconian measures which will allow the detainment of patients in their homes. The Act is not geared towards supporting or offering services to service users and instead is a basis on which mental health sufferers will have their rights violated as sufferers and as human beings. The legislation is yet another means to further marginalise mental health sufferers and make their behaviour a law and order question, instead of providing much needed services. As Paul Farmer, chief executive of Mind, states: "People with mental health problems need better health services not more legislation."

Community groups are concerned that this latest development will drive those in need away from seeking help for fear of being subject to forced treatment. Figures by the Department of Health reveal that more people than ever before were compulsorily admitted to hospital under the Mental Health Act in 2005/2006. The number of these detentions has been rising year on year since that Act’s introduction in 1983, contrary to any government suggestion that there would be no such increase.

Professionals’ authority to detain patients within the community has also been widened in one of the most disturbing clauses in the new Act. This is the introduction of Compulsory Treatment Orders (CTOs). These measures allow doctors to specify a treatment and lifestyle plan that the service user would be obliged to adhere to in their own homes. "Based on the history of how services are used by our communities it will probably mean people being effectively imprisoned within their homes, lonely, isolated and rejected," said Rev Paul Grey from the New Testament Church of God in Nuneaton. These CTOs will also sweep far more people than suggested into compulsory treatment, diverting resources away from services which should be provided when a person becomes "mentally ill". The government says that CTOs will only be applied to a small group of people, around 1,400, yet research by the Kings Fund health think-tank showed that the figure is likely to be much higher. The organisation Mind thinks that even the Kings Fund estimate is conservative, stating, "With more and more people being detained under the Mental Health Act, government estimates of the use of CTOs are simply not believable."

In the debate about the Bill, service users, mental health staff and community groups expressed anger and frustration over the government’s continued commitment to reform proposals that experts believe are seriously misguided. For eight years, the views of doctors, psychiatrists, charities, researchers, and most importantly the service users themselves have been ignored. "It is very disappointing that the government has not taken on board the concerns that were clearly outlined to them during our meetings with the Department of Health," said Pastor Desmond Hall, chair of Christians Together in Brent. "It feels like a lot of our time was taken up without taking us seriously. This does not send out a good message to our communities."

The government’s own research has shown that CTOs have no therapeutic value. There are particular concerns about national minority communities; a Count Me census showed that African Caribbean people were 38% more likely to be sectioned than others, and research shows that they are also more likely to be subject to CTOs. Health experts have warned this new law will pose real "dangers" to such communities.

Although the Act has been passed, receiving the Royal Assent on July 19, the fight for a social mental health service goes on. As Rev Paul Grey stated, "The state has to remember that it is there to serve those who have a voice as well as those who do not. Until this happens we will continue to back any calls for justice within mental health services, including supporting calls for a judicial review."

How the Act will operate in practice, especially given the problem of resources and the lack of recognition of society’s responsibility, remains to be seen. However, it is certain that the fight is ongoing against bad legislation that will in practice do damage to communities and individuals. What is required is for society to take up care and responsibility for mental health sufferers, and for government to legislate to guarantee the resources for the appropriate social bodies to be able to fulfil this responsibility. The outlook underlying the government’s legislation is that there is a class of people separate from so-called normality. Social control is therefore necessary, the argument goes, over those with a "mental disorder" or "illness". The role of mental health professionals in this scenario is to be agents of this social control and provide the rest of society with protection against those with disorders or illnesses. In this scenario, again society is let off the hook. The fact that society is the conditioning factor for the stresses that lead to mental health suffering for the vulnerable and sensitive is left out of account. With the loss of coherence that this denial brings about, degrees of stress and outright physical illness as a result are the norm, not the exception.

It cannot be accepted that an individual’s behaviour or departure from the prevailing ideological and cultural norms as decreed by those in power should be made the target of punitive legislation. Instead of being stigmatised and tragic cases promoted to justify the prohibition of basic freedoms, mental health sufferers, as with everyone with special needs of various degrees and kinds, should be affirmed as human beings and be given every support, including the right of self-determination. As a whole, the people must ensure that a human-centred society prevails and organise to bring such a society into being, in unity with all those that are oppressed by the present anti-social political and economic system.