The responses of professional groups to the use of Section 136 of the Mental Health Act (1983, as amended by the 2007 Act) in Gloucestershire

Author:

Riley G1,Laidlaw J1,Pugh D23,Freeman E4

Affiliation:

1. Research Assistant

2. Consultant Psychiatrist, 2gether NHS Foundation Trust

3. Mental Health Act Implementation Manager, Gloucestershire Primary Care NHS Trust and Gloucestershire County Council

4. Primary Care Research Facilitator, Research & Development Support Unit, Gloucestershire Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Gloucester, UK

Abstract

Background Section 136 (S136) of the Mental Health Act (1983, as amended by the 2007 Act) empowers the police to detain those suspected of being mentally disordered in a public place and to convey them to a place of safety (POS) for further assessment. Gloucestershire has not had a specialist facility for S136 detentions and individuals were taken to the police cells or occasionally A&E departments for assessment. Aims This paper forms one part of three aspects under investigation. Two companion papers by the authors describe the use of S136 using anonymised audit data and the experiences of detainees. The objectives of this paper have been to assess the responses of the different professional groups involved in the process of S136. Method An anonymous postal questionnaire was distributed to eight groups of professionals who were identified as having the potential to be involved in part of the process of a S136 detention. Results were collated and analysed, and formed the basis for a series of follow-up focus groups within groups to explore themes that warranted further investigation. Results An overall response rate of 59% was achieved. Seventy-four per cent of participants thought that there should be an alternative POS to the police station. A&E was thought to be an unsuitable alternative POS, with a psychiatric hospital being the first choice for 58%. Conclusions There is a gap in the expectations of the different agencies involved in the S136 process, which have the potential to be divisive if interagency pathways and agreements are not in place.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Law,Health Policy,Issues, ethics and legal aspects

Cited by 6 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3