Profit not a factor in hospital move

IF one is given to airing opinions on something as important as society’s treatment of the mentally ill, then it is only proper one is familiar with the real facts of the situation, as well as overall intent and trend.

Nowhere in his letter (Irish Examiner, August 1) does Sean O’Neill display such a familiarity. Consequently, what readers got was sloganeering and third-hand gossip.

The misrepresentation of the reasons for moving the location of the Central Mental Hospital cannot go unchallenged. The reason for the construction of the new complex at Thornton Hall is a matter of public record: the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) reported in both 1998 and 2002 on conditions and services in the Central Mental Hospital.

On both occasions that body remarked on the differences in the quality of patient accommodation between newer units of the hospital and the older building. In its 1998 report, the CPT referred to the ‘decidedly antiquated appearance’ of the main building, and it was particularly — and correctly — critical of the fact patients in that section of the hospital were compelled to use chamber pots at night.

The CPT also specifically noted (recommendation 103) that ‘the aim in any psychiatric establishment should be to offer material conditions which are conducive to the treatment and welfare of patients; in psychiatric terms, a positive therapeutic environment … providing sufficient living space per patient … adequate lighting, heating and ventilation, maintaining the establishment in a satisfactory state of repair and meeting hospital hygiene requirements’.

I take that recommendation very seriously. I’d like to think Mr O’Neill would agree with me in recognising that the individuals concerned are patients — not criminals — and we are duty-bound to give them the highest standards of treatment of which we are capable.

In the context of the CPT reports, and in light of what I saw on my first visit to the Central Mental Hospital in 2003, I decided a new state-of-the-art facility was required. These people were among the weakest and most vulnerable in this state. They have lost the mental wherewithal to make their way through our tumultuous society and it debases them — and us — to allow them to languish in a grim fortress like Dundrum. They had to be delivered from that, and I am proud of my role in that ongoing project.

Why Thornton Hall? Well, regrettably, not all people are as enlightened as I would hope. We envisaged resistance in communities from those frightened to have a mental hospital of the planned scale in their midst. Mental hospitals, like prisons, tend not to be welcomed by communities. We therefore twinned our project with that of Justice Minister Michael McDowell; in that way, time devoted to objections and reservations would be halved and the new hospital would be delivered faster.

That’s it. Those are the reasons behind a move that according to Mr O’Neill is an ‘unseemly rush to generate profit’.

One final thought: when the Tánaiste Mary Harney and I said the interests of the patient would be put at the centre of every decision regarding our health service, there was a great deal of head-nodding.

However, as that philosophy is rolled out into practice, we see flashes of irritation from people who may not have grasped the real nature of putting the patient at the heart of the system.

The patients in Dundrum need and deserve a proper facility. They’re going to get it. If that means exposing ourselves to attacks from certain parties then that is a risk I am happy to take.

Tim O’Malley TD

Minister of State

Department of Health & Children

Hawkins House

Hawkins Street

Dublin 2