Woman seeks order for release from psychiatric hospital
The case, described by Mr Justice Gerard Hogan as “unusual”, raises issues under the Mental Health Act including how a person who is a voluntary patient may have their status altered to involuntary. The judge will rule on the matter today.
A central issue concerns whether there is a power to detain a person admitted as a voluntary patient who refuses treatment but also refuses to leave. While the Mental Health Act provides such a power where a person tries to escape, the judge was told the sides dispute whether it caters for involuntary detention of a patient who refuses to leave unless she is transferred to another hospital.
The woman, aged in her mid-40s, alleges she went to the hospital on Apr 23 as a voluntary patient but her status was changed on Jun 7 to an involuntary patient.
It is alleged the procedure used to effect that change was unlawful.
Colm Smyth, counsel for the woman, said she had not accepted her full treatment and there was “at least a personality clash” between her and some of her doctors.
She wanted to be treated in another hospital but did not want to be treated involuntarily as that had implications for her professional standing. Her concern was the application for transfer was made after she was placed in involuntary detention and not before.
It seemed, having been admitted as a voluntary patient, her status was changed because she was refusing prescribed treatment and that also happened before a hearing of the Mental He-alth Tribunal, counsel said. It was his case that all that happened after the involuntary detention was tainted.
Paul Anthony McDermott, for the hospital, the woman’s treating psychiatrists, and the HSE, argued the case was really about the woman’s desire to move to a different, private hospital. He said the court was being asked to find a gap in a protective law so that transfer could be effected and his side rejected arguments this case raised any lacuna in the Mental Health Acts.
