h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: The UK's Mental Health Act (1983) - A48970173
Author: Alex Tufty Ashman [!] - U566116


This one might have been included in the Mental Health project I'm working on (A45698746), but since it's been such hard work I'm going to put it through now.

Alex

Nice work, Alex

I can see how much effort you've put in to make this complex piece of legislation accessible.

I wonder if it would be softened further with a few examples to illustrate it. Maybe a couple of cases of prominent people being sectioned (Stephen Fry was once, I seem to remember). Alternatively, you could see if any h2g2 Researchers have had experience of this.

Icy

Stephen Fry link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/health/tv_and_radio/secretlife_documentary.shtml

Well done with a very complex and frightening subject. I am sure this will help a lot of people. I wish such simplified information had been around when my Mum was assessed (many, many years ago) and found to have dementia.

Just a couple of nitpicks:

<>

Should that be 'is a risk to themselves or other people' ?

If that changes your meaning, perhaps you can make it clearer.

<< In the England and Wales,>>

should read - In England and Wales,


Websailor

Nice, readable entry on a huge subject, Alex

Only minor quibble I have is regarding the title, "The UK's Mental Health Act (1983)". The Mental Health Act only covers people in England & Wales.

Although very similar in substance, patients in Scotland were previously subject to the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984 which was then superceded by the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003. Some of the sections were slightly different.

In Northern Ireland, patients were subject to the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, which has been updated in the The Mental Health (Amendment) (Northern Ireland) Order 2004.

I know you touch on on this by mentioning England & Wales in the text, but perhaps just leaving out the UK in the title would do, with a brief mention where it is valid or a footnote or last paragraph regarding Scotland & NI?

I've made those changes and added an important section that I realised I'd missed (Section 63). I'm not sure ho to go about using examples - most of the sections are quite specific, and any number may be used during the various encounters with any one patient.

It's your call. I think you've done an altogether fine job of it

I have to ask this: is there a section 42?

I could give an example of a fictional patient going through a series of sections - does that sound like a good idea?

I've added section 42

Yes, I think it might make this more accessible.

That sounds like a good idea. There are so many mental health issues that this covers, that a general fictionalised account might help.

Websailor

How's that?

That works for me

Well done Alex

That is very useful.

Some questions: would he be recalled if he stopped taking his medication after the three months? Would he be under his GP for regular check ups (in an ideal world)? and briefly how much difference is there between paranoid schizophrenia and schizophrenia generally?

Websailor

I like the updates Alex, very readable and easily understood now. As an ex-Mental Health Occupational Therapist, I'm still very interested in the field and any clarification of the confusing aspects of mental health is appreciated.

Webby, most patients who had been previously sectioned would have community follow up through a CMHT - Community Mental Health Team - with regular outpatient appointments with his GP, psychiatrist, attendance at Mental Health day centres etc but not under subject of a section.

May be worth a footnote or left for another entry as this one is specifically about sectioned patients and not aftercare.

Deakie, Thanks for the info. That was what I thought should happen, but we only tend to hear about it when the system fails.

Websailor

I've made those changes

I actually had a lecture on this today, and I've added a few more points that needed making about the new Act (see the second paragraph under "History" and the penultimate paragraph under "Definitions of Mental Illness"). Also, I was wrong about the Section 17A - it lasts for six months, and is not affected by the status of the Section 3 - so I've corrected the example.

To nitpick a previous nitpick,



The individual is singular so must be at risk from "himself" or "herself"; "his or her self" would be ok.

Further,

who are they? The illnesses? No. I assume you mean the individuals. It would also be better to refer to "an individual" rather than "the individual". I would use "person" rather than "individual" but that is for reasons of grammar and "individual" may be more suitable in context.

May I suggest that the first paragraph would be better like this?

"While the majority of people with a mental health problem can be treated entirely outside of hospital, it is possible for mental illness to become severe to the point that a person is a risk to himself or is at risk from other people. Illnesses, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and severe depression, can make people liable to deliberate self harm or self-neglect, and may leave a person open to physical, emotional or fiscal exploitation by others. Some sufferers of acute mental illness can also become a danger to the public."

It is hard to correct the grammar and retain the meaning because I don't know the facts of the matter. My last sentence loses your emphasis of the small number of sufferers and I used the word "acute" arbitrarily (and possibly incorrectly!) However, some of what you've written doesn't make sense and needs to be changed. I'll have to look through the rest of the entry so please allow me some time to get back to it.

This entry would be a great addition to the EG, and the layout, tone and information appear to be fine, but I'd be unhappy if it was added without some rewriting.