The author discusses how the new statutory right to advocacy in England under the new Mental Health Act could prove a mixed blessing. In Scotland, anyone with a mental disorder has a statutory right to advocacy, in England and Wales, however, the right to advocacy is confined only to patients under section.
The author discusses how the new statutory right to advocacy in England under the new Mental Health Act could prove a mixed blessing. In Scotland, anyone with a mental disorder has a statutory right to advocacy, in England and Wales, however, the right to advocacy is confined only to patients under section.
Subject terms:
mental health problems, rights, service users, advocacy;
Film providing a simple but authoritative overview of qualifying patients' right to independent mental health advocacy. It also covers how advocates can help and what the benefits are for people who use services. Key messages include: that IMHA is a free services; IMHAS are independent; they help you decide what you want. Actors are used in some of the scenes in the film.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Film providing a simple but authoritative overview of qualifying patients' right to independent mental health advocacy. It also covers how advocates can help and what the benefits are for people who use services. Key messages include: that IMHA is a free services; IMHAS are independent; they help you decide what you want. Actors are used in some of the scenes in the film.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
advocacy, mental health problems, service users, access to services, rights, patients, Independent Mental Health Advocacy;
This briefing provides information about Independent Mental Health Advocate provision for people who use mental health services in England. People detained under most sections of the Mental Health Act have a right to be referred to an Independent Mental Health Advocate, whether they are in hospital or on a community treatment order. Independent Mental Health Advocates provide an important protection to make sure that people know about their rights and get their voice heard.
(Edited publisher abstract)
This briefing provides information about Independent Mental Health Advocate provision for people who use mental health services in England. People detained under most sections of the Mental Health Act have a right to be referred to an Independent Mental Health Advocate, whether they are in hospital or on a community treatment order. Independent Mental Health Advocates provide an important protection to make sure that people know about their rights and get their voice heard.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
mental capacity, service users, rights, advocacy, mental health problems, Independent Mental Health Advocacy;
Mental health advocacy is a relatively new concept, developed with a view to reducing stigma and discrimination, and promoting the human rights of people with mental disorders. It consists of various actions aimed at changing the major structural and attitudinal barriers to achieving positive mental health outcomes in populations. This module draws attention to the importance of advocacy in mental health policy and service development. The roles of various mental health groups in advocacy are outlined. Practical steps are then recommended, indicating how ministries of health can support advocacy. Part of a series on good practice in mental health care.
Mental health advocacy is a relatively new concept, developed with a view to reducing stigma and discrimination, and promoting the human rights of people with mental disorders. It consists of various actions aimed at changing the major structural and attitudinal barriers to achieving positive mental health outcomes in populations. This module draws attention to the importance of advocacy in mental health policy and service development. The roles of various mental health groups in advocacy are outlined. Practical steps are then recommended, indicating how ministries of health can support advocacy. Part of a series on good practice in mental health care.
Extended abstract:
Author
WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION.
Title
Advocacy for mental health.
Publisher
World Health Organization, 2003
Summary
This module, part of the Mental Health Policy and Service Guidance package, draws attention to the importance of advocacy in mental health policy and service development. The roles of various mental health groups in advocacy are outlined and practical steps are recommended, indicating how ministries of health can support advocacy.
Context
Mental health advocacy is a relatively new concept, developed with a view to reducing stigma and discrimination and promoting the human rights of people with mental disorders. It consists of various actions aimed at changing the major structural and attitudinal barriers to achieving positive mental health outcomes in populations. Advocacy in this field began when the families of people with mental disorders first made their voices heard. People with mental disorders then added their own contributions. Gradually, these people and their families were joined and supported by a range of organisations, many mental health workers and their associations, and some governments. Recently, the concept of advocacy has been broadened to include the needs and rights of persons with mild mental disorders and the mental health needs and rights of the general population.
Contents
The book begins with an executive summary, aims, and the target audience. The aims are given as to provide guidance to ministries of health on the development of mental health advocacy in countries or regions, and the audience as policy-makers and public health professionals in ministries of health (or health offices) of countries or large administrative divisions of countries (regions, states, provinces); advocacy groups representing people with mental disorders and their families; and general health workers and mental health workers.
Chapter 1 asks what advocacy is and why it is important, discussing the concept of mental health advocacy, barriers to mental health, positive mental health outcomes, the development of the mental health advocacy movement, and the importance of mental health advocacy. The roles of different groups in advocacy is discussed in Chapter 2: consumers and families, non-governmental organisations, general health workers and mental health workers, and policy makers and planners. Chapter 3 explains how ministries of health can support advocacy activities with consumer groups, family groups and non-governmental organisations, with general health workers and mental health workers, with policy-makers and planners, and with the general population. Detailed steps, subdivided into tasks, are given. General strategies for supporting advocacy activities with the general population, and the role of the mass media in advocacy, are also discussed. Examples of good practice in advocacy from Brazil , Italy , Uganda , Australia , Mexico , Spain and Mongolia are given in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 gives barriers and solutions to supporting advocacy from ministries of health. Barriers include resistance from policy-makers and planners, division and friction between mental health advocacy groups, resistance and antagonism from general health workers and mental health workers, very few people seem interested in mental health advocacy, confusion about the theories and rationale of mental health advocacy, and there are few or no consumer groups, family groups or non-governmental organisations dedicated to mental health advocacy. Solutions for all are given. Chapter 6 gives recommendations for countries with no, few and several advocacy groups. Information is also given in boxes, and most chapters end with key points. Definitions, further reading and references end the book.
34 references
Subject terms:
mental health care, mental health problems, mental health services, rights, United Nations, advocacy;
Care and Health Magazine, 5.10.04, 2004, pp.18-20.
Publisher:
Care and Health
A draft code of practice, published to accompany the Mental Capacity Bill through parliament, clarifies the law on decision making for people who lack mental capacity. Discusses the opinions of practitioners who say the legislation will have no power unless it provides for independent advocates.
A draft code of practice, published to accompany the Mental Capacity Bill through parliament, clarifies the law on decision making for people who lack mental capacity. Discusses the opinions of practitioners who say the legislation will have no power unless it provides for independent advocates.
Subject terms:
law, learning disabilities, mental health problems, rights, advocacy, decision making;
International Social Work, 41(2), April 1998, pp.155-168.
Publisher:
Sage
Advocacy has emerged as a key concept in the process of the modernisation of western psychiatry. This article combines a general discussion of the advocacy approach with an analysis of its application in practice. Two projects which are among the most advanced projects of professional advocacy in European mental health are used for discussion.
Advocacy has emerged as a key concept in the process of the modernisation of western psychiatry. This article combines a general discussion of the advocacy approach with an analysis of its application in practice. Two projects which are among the most advanced projects of professional advocacy in European mental health are used for discussion.
Subject terms:
mental health problems, mental health services, psychiatry, rights, advocacy, comparative studies, empowerment;
Health and Social Care in the Community, 23(3), 2015, pp.313-324.
Publisher:
Wiley
Given the context of increasing numbers of people detained under the Mental Health Act and heightened awareness of the potential for neglect and abuse in human services, statutory advocacy is an important safeguard supporting human rights and democratising the social relationships of care. This article reports findings from a national review of Independent Mental Health Advocate (IMHA) provision in England. A qualitative study used a two-stage design to define quality and assess the experience and impact of IMHA provision in eight study sites. A sample of 289 participants - 75 focus group participants and 214 individuals interviewed - including 90 people eligible for IMHA services, as well as advocates, a range of hospital and community-based mental health professionals, and commissioners. The research team included people with experience of compulsion. Findings indicate that the experience of compulsion can be profoundly disempowering, confirming the need for IMHA. However, access was highly variable and more problematic for people with specific needs relating to ethnicity, age and disability. Uptake of IMHA services was influenced by available resources, attitude and understanding of mental health professionals, as well as the organisation of IMHA provision. Access could be improved through a system of opt-out as opposed to opt-in. Service user satisfaction was most frequently reported in terms of positive experiences of the process of advocacy rather than tangible impacts on care and treatment under the Mental Health Act. IMHA services have the potential to significantly shift the dynamic so that service users have more of a voice in their care and treatment. However, a shift is needed from a narrow conception of statutory advocacy as safeguarding rights to one emphasising self-determination and participation in decisions about care and treatment.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Given the context of increasing numbers of people detained under the Mental Health Act and heightened awareness of the potential for neglect and abuse in human services, statutory advocacy is an important safeguard supporting human rights and democratising the social relationships of care. This article reports findings from a national review of Independent Mental Health Advocate (IMHA) provision in England. A qualitative study used a two-stage design to define quality and assess the experience and impact of IMHA provision in eight study sites. A sample of 289 participants - 75 focus group participants and 214 individuals interviewed - including 90 people eligible for IMHA services, as well as advocates, a range of hospital and community-based mental health professionals, and commissioners. The research team included people with experience of compulsion. Findings indicate that the experience of compulsion can be profoundly disempowering, confirming the need for IMHA. However, access was highly variable and more problematic for people with specific needs relating to ethnicity, age and disability. Uptake of IMHA services was influenced by available resources, attitude and understanding of mental health professionals, as well as the organisation of IMHA provision. Access could be improved through a system of opt-out as opposed to opt-in. Service user satisfaction was most frequently reported in terms of positive experiences of the process of advocacy rather than tangible impacts on care and treatment under the Mental Health Act. IMHA services have the potential to significantly shift the dynamic so that service users have more of a voice in their care and treatment. However, a shift is needed from a narrow conception of statutory advocacy as safeguarding rights to one emphasising self-determination and participation in decisions about care and treatment.
(Edited publisher abstract)
Subject terms:
empowerment, advocacy, user views, rights, mental health law, evaluation, compulsory detention, service uptake, mental health problems, Independent Mental Health Advocacy;
GREAT BRITAIN. Parliament. House of Commons. Health Committee
Publisher:
Stationery Office
Publication year:
2013
Pagination:
87
Place of publication:
London
The Mental Health Act 2007 amended and updated the Mental Health Act 1983, which remains the cornerstone of mental health legislation in England. The measures in the 2007 Act were proposed to reflect the changing ways in the treatment and care of patients with mental health problems. The 2007 Act included a single definition of mental disorder, to incorporate conditions not accounted for in the original legislation. In this post-legislative scrutiny of the 2007 Act, the Health Committee is concerned that the Department of Health does not have a clear picture of what is leading to increased rates of detention, and whether or how pressure on beds is having a detrimental effect on treatment. Patients who manage to access treatment voluntarily are subject to ‘de facto detention’, whereby they are detained under section if they seek to leave hospital. Supervised Community Treatment (SCT) was introduced in the 2007 Act, to enable some patients with mental disorder to live and be treated in the community. However, number of patients subject to compulsion under the 2007 Act has increased as a result of SCT. The Committee found evidence about the effective application of deprivation of liberty safeguards (DOLS) for people suffering from mental incapacity "profoundly depressing and complacent". The Department of Health should undertake an urgent review of the implementation of DOLS, which should be presented to Parliament, together with an action plan for improvement, within 12 months. Although the 2007 Act did not inherently disadvantage minority ethnic patients, the numbers subject to Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) is even more disproportionate than the number detained in psychiatric hospitals. The Committee recommends that local authorities should ensure they commission culturally sensitive and effective advocacy services. A more successful outcome investigated by the Committee was the use of Independent Mental Health Advocates (IMHAs).
(Original abstract)
The Mental Health Act 2007 amended and updated the Mental Health Act 1983, which remains the cornerstone of mental health legislation in England. The measures in the 2007 Act were proposed to reflect the changing ways in the treatment and care of patients with mental health problems. The 2007 Act included a single definition of mental disorder, to incorporate conditions not accounted for in the original legislation. In this post-legislative scrutiny of the 2007 Act, the Health Committee is concerned that the Department of Health does not have a clear picture of what is leading to increased rates of detention, and whether or how pressure on beds is having a detrimental effect on treatment. Patients who manage to access treatment voluntarily are subject to ‘de facto detention’, whereby they are detained under section if they seek to leave hospital. Supervised Community Treatment (SCT) was introduced in the 2007 Act, to enable some patients with mental disorder to live and be treated in the community. However, number of patients subject to compulsion under the 2007 Act has increased as a result of SCT. The Committee found evidence about the effective application of deprivation of liberty safeguards (DOLS) for people suffering from mental incapacity "profoundly depressing and complacent". The Department of Health should undertake an urgent review of the implementation of DOLS, which should be presented to Parliament, together with an action plan for improvement, within 12 months. Although the 2007 Act did not inherently disadvantage minority ethnic patients, the numbers subject to Community Treatment Orders (CTOs) is even more disproportionate than the number detained in psychiatric hospitals. The Committee recommends that local authorities should ensure they commission culturally sensitive and effective advocacy services. A more successful outcome investigated by the Committee was the use of Independent Mental Health Advocates (IMHAs).
(Original abstract)
Subject terms:
mental health services, advocacy, supervised community treatment, compulsory treatment, compulsory detention, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, mental health law, mental health care, mental health problems, rights;
The Mental Health Act 1983 governs the compulsory treatment of certain people who have a mental disorder. The purpose of the Mental Health Act 2007 was to amend the 1983 Act in a number of areas. The Mental Health Act 2007 also introduced ‘deprivation of liberty safeguards’ and extended the rights of victims. Between 3 and 5 years after an Act of Parliament has received Royal Assent, it is reviewed by the relevant Government Department and then by Parliament, to see how the law has worked in practice, a process known as ‘post-legislative scrutiny’. This memorandum provides a preliminary assessment of the Mental Health Act 2007. It reviews the changes that the 2007 Act made to the Mental Health Act 1983. Specifically, it provides assessment of the effects of the following elements of the Mental Health Act 2007: single definition of mental disorder; appropriate medical treatment; guiding principles; professional roles; nearest relatives’ rights; independent mental health advocacy; supervised community treatment; places of safety; age-appropriate accommodation; Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards; and victims’ rights.
The Mental Health Act 1983 governs the compulsory treatment of certain people who have a mental disorder. The purpose of the Mental Health Act 2007 was to amend the 1983 Act in a number of areas. The Mental Health Act 2007 also introduced ‘deprivation of liberty safeguards’ and extended the rights of victims. Between 3 and 5 years after an Act of Parliament has received Royal Assent, it is reviewed by the relevant Government Department and then by Parliament, to see how the law has worked in practice, a process known as ‘post-legislative scrutiny’. This memorandum provides a preliminary assessment of the Mental Health Act 2007. It reviews the changes that the 2007 Act made to the Mental Health Act 1983. Specifically, it provides assessment of the effects of the following elements of the Mental Health Act 2007: single definition of mental disorder; appropriate medical treatment; guiding principles; professional roles; nearest relatives’ rights; independent mental health advocacy; supervised community treatment; places of safety; age-appropriate accommodation; Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards; and victims’ rights.
Subject terms:
mental health care, mental health law, mental health problems, rights, supervised community treatment, advocacy, compulsory detention, compulsory treatment, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards;