Court rejects claims by woman that her detention in mental hospital amounts to torture
The High Court has dismissed a female patient's claims that her continued detention in seclusion at a psychiatric hospital is unlawful on the grounds that it amounts to torture and inhuman treatment.
The woman, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, has suffered from serious psychiatric illnesses for many years and was also the victim of a violent rape, has been shadowed by security after she attacked a nurse at the hospital she has been detained at.
Today Mr Justice Peter Charlton dismissed an action brought on behalf of the woman claiming her detention was unlawful. The Judge added that he could not make an order, which she had sought, for a transfer to the Central Mental Hospital ahead of other patients currently on a waiting list to get into that facility.
The woman brought proceedings against the HSE and the Clinical Director of the Central Mental Hospital claiming that she nursing staff at the hospital she is currently detained have been rough with her, and that she has not been transferred to the Central Mental Hospital where better facilities for her care exist.
Her transfer was recommended after her attack on the nurse. However she has spent almost a year on a waiting list to get into that facility. She claimed that her detention at the hospital under the 2001 Mental Health Act constituted torture, inhuman or degrading treatment pursuant to Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
The court heard the woman has a history of attacking other patients and looks at staff in an aggressive and vacant manner and has been nursed in seclusion since November last year after she violently assaulted a nurse at the hospital by pulling their hair, knocking her to the ground and kicking the nurse.
Staff members who attended her victim, who lost a number of teeth as well as sustaining other injuries, described the woman as smiling after the attack. Since then she has been shadowed by a security officer everywhere she goes in the hospital, and sleeps in quarters with the window blacked out.
In his judgment Mr Justice Peter Charleton held that the terms of her detention are not unreasonable, and did not amount to torture or inhuman behaviour.
While she may benefit from a transfer to the CHM, which has 93 beds, but just 8 for women, the court "could not be expected to order her transfer in the context of scarce resources in preference to other patients on the waiting list."
The Judge said that while her isolation and her being shadowed was regrettable, it was also understandable. He noted that her isolation has eased since her behaviour has eased.
While her right to privacy had been infringed by the conditions of her confinement, what was done was necessary for her proper care and treatment.
The Judge said that he was satisfied that at all times the parties involved intended to treat the woman in a way that was compatible with her right to dignity guaranteed by the Constitution and the ECHR.
