Mental Health Legal Centre Inc.
Lacking Insight - Appendices
Appendices
Appendix 1 - List of Abbreviations
Appendix 2 - Stakeholder Steering Group Members
Appendix 3 - Promotional material
Appendix 4 - Semi-Structured In-depth Interview Prompts
Appendix 1 - List of Abbreviations
Initials: These have been used to identify consumers interviewed. The second initial indicates the gender of the interviewee: M male or F female.
The Act - The Mental Health Act 1986 (Vic)
The Board - The Mental Health Review Board
The Centre - Mental Health Legal Centre
The Charter - The Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic)
The Convention - United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
CTO - Community Treatment Order
DHS - Department of Human Services, Victoria
ITO - Involuntary Treatment Order
MI Principles -The United Nations Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and the Improvement of Mental Health Care 1991
Appendix 2 - Stakeholder Steering Group Members
Four Involuntary Patient Representatives
President, Law Institute of Victoria
Mr John Lesser, President Mental Health Review Board Vic
Mr Ron Cahill, Chief Magistrate ACT, President Mental Health Tribunal ACT
Professor Terry Carney, University of Sydney, Immediate Past President, International Academy of Law and Mental Health
Dr Duncan Chappell, Chair of the CEPS International Advisory Board, currently a Professorial Fellow at the University of Wollongong’s Centre for Transnational Crime Prevention. Former President, Mental Health Review Tribunal NSW
Associate Professor, Dr David Tait, School of Law, University of Canberra
Dave Clarke CEO, VICSERV – Psychiatric Disability Services of Victoria
Ms Isabel Collins, Director, Victorian Mental Illness Awareness Association
Dr Ian Freckelton SC, Mental Health Review Board Member and Barrister
Mr Julian Gardner, Former Mental Health Review Board President and Former Public Advocate
Mr John Hickey, Department of Human Services Representative, VICCAG – Consumer and Carer Advisory Group
Mary Macrae, Carer Consultant
Professor Bernadette McSherry, Mental Health Review Board member. Australian Research Council Federation Fellow, Rethinking Mental Health Laws Project, Faculty of Law, Monash University
Ms Robyn Mills, Manager, Human Rights Civil Law Section, Victoria Legal Aid
Ms Vivienne Topp, Policy Co-ordinator, Lawyer, Mental Health Legal Centre
Representative, Mental Health Law Centre, Western Australia
Chief Psychiatrist, Department of Human Services Victoria
Mr Robert Wheeler, Legal Aid NSW
Professor Bob Williams, Mental Health Review Board Member, Faculty of Law, Monash University
Appendix 3 - Promotional material, distributed by VICSERV, VMIAC, to all consumer consultants and to area mental health services:
Mental Health Legal Centre Inc
Level 4, 520 Collins Street, Melbourne Vic 3000
Reg. No. AOO1366S
A.B.N. 30 996 171 084
Phone: (03) 9629 4422 Fax: (03) 9614 0488 Country Callers: 1800 555 887
Website: www.communitylaw.org.au/mentalhealth
Have you had an experience with the Mental Health Review Board?
‘Involuntary Patient Experience of the Mental Health Review in Victoria – What is it and How Does the Process Work?’
The Mental Health Legal Centre is currently undertaking a research project exploring people’s experiences of mental health review in Victoria and the Mental Health Review Board. This will include any applications, hearings, and follow-up from Mental Health Review Board hearings. The project largely aims to record the experience of the mental health review process from the perspective of consumers (those that have been involuntary patients).
In addition to the perspective of consumers other stakeholders, including carers, Mental Health Review Board members, community organisations and professional groups will be sought. Focus groups and interviews will be undertaken to collect qualitative data from participants, to identify possible strategies for further enhancing service quality standards of the mental health review process, including in areas of communication, representation and reform.
The project team is now looking for people who would be interested in participating in focus groups and interviews during the next few months. Please express your interest by contacting the Project Worker, Mim Ingvarson either via e-mail at Miriam_Ingvarson@fcl.fl.asn.au or on 9629 4422. If you require an interpreter please let us know and one will be arranged for you.
Thank-you for your interest and support of this project.
Please rip off a copy of my contact name and phone number to call
Appendix 4 - Semi-Structured In-depth Interview Prompts
Interviews with stakeholders utilised this framework, adapted appropriately to the particular role of each interviewee:
Semi-Structured In-depth Interview Prompts
I’d like to start off by asking you to describe how it was that you came before the Mental Health Review Board?
or
Can you tell me about your experiences that led you to appearing before the Mental Health Review Board?
and
Can you tell me why you were interested in participating in this project?
1. The Hearing Process
Individuals’ access to information regarding hearings
-
What access did you have to information regarding your rights, including appeals mechanisms, involved in the Board process?
-
What information did the Board provide to you;
-
What format did that take? Was it valuable? Were you easily able to understand its contents?
-
Were you given notice of the hearing/s? Was this adequate / helpful?
-
Were you informed of your right to legal representation?
-
Were you able to access legal representation?
-
What issues were a part of your decision to attend / not attend the hearing/s; reasons, issues and how you were assisted in these decisions?
-
What access did you have to your case information – right to inspect documents, case file, doctor’s report.
-
What experiences did you have that provided for a forward-looking approach to your treatment?
-
What was your understanding of the Board’s process?
How easy was this to understand?
-
Did you feel your privacy / confidentiality was respected? Reasons given for breaches if any?
2. Environment and Conduct of Hearings
-
Can you describe the waiting area pre-hearing?
-
What was the order of those speaking during the hearing?
-
Can you describe the physical environment and layout of hearing space?
-
Did you feel any ownership of the space? By whom, why and how?
-
Can you tell me about the Board members manner, eye contact, warmth or civility?
-
What was the level of formality of proceedings?
-
Explore any gender issues – were there any gender issues?
-
Did you experience any cultural and/or language difficulties during the hearing, including use of jargon and use of interpreters
-
Did you feel you had a right to be listened to? – Explore appearance of a token effort, having a fair say
-
Issue of appeals and reviews being held by the same Board members as the previous hearing – discuss.
-
Did you understand the Board’s weighting of evidence? How was this explained to you / how did you understand this?
3. Outcomes of Hearings
-
Was there any exploration and examination of least restrictive treatment options for you through the hearing?
-
Do you see the Board as being able to be used as a forum to discuss treatment plans and the administration of these? If so why and/or how would you like to see this work?
-
Did anyone explain to you what would happen if you were to be discharged from involuntary status - prior to and after hearing?
-
Do you know of the consumer complaints mechanisms? Would you use these? Are these useful avenues?
-
Did you understand the decisions being made about your treatment as voluntary or involuntary, by the Board?
-
Reviews are scheduled at 8 weeks, which is the equal longest time in Victoria as anywhere is Australia, and appeals within 14 days of lodgement. How did these time frames affect your experience?
-
What was the emotional experience of the hearing for you?
-
Did you feel that you were taken seriously? Were your viewpoints adequately heard by the Board?
-
Did the Board explain to you why they had made their decision? How was this done?
-
Did you request a Statement of Reasons? Why / why not?
-
Did anyone talk the process / decision made by the Board / through with you afterwards?
4. Role of the Mental Health Review Board
-
What level of confidence do you hold in the Board as upholding the law and protecting the rights of involuntary patients?
-
What support did you receive from the Board? DHS? Area Mental Health Service?
-
What would you recommend should be included in the training and induction of Board members?
-
How do you understand the different roles of the Board members? Community member, lawyer, doctor? For example, what is the effectiveness / reason for / of community members?
5. Advocates and Legal Representatives – As Appropriate
-
What do you see is the role of legal representation?
-
How do you think legal representation is interpreted by Board members?
-
How did you access advocacy?
-
Do you believe advocacy creates a fairer process? How?
-
Why do you think the level of legal representation of involuntary patients is so low?
-
How effective are the community members? Why do you think this?
References
Auditor General Victoria 2002, Mental health services for people in crisis, Victoria.
Australian Health Ministers 2003 – 2008, National Mental Health Plan 2003 – 2008, Australian Government, Canberra.
Brophy, Lisa & McDermott, Fiona 2003, ‘What's driving involuntary treatment in the community? The social, policy, legal and ethical context’, Australasian Psychiatry, vol. 11, Supplement.
Brophy, Lisa M. et al. 2006, ‘A cluster analysis of people on Community Treatment Orders in Victoria, Australia’, Law and Psychiatry, vol. 29, pp. 469-481.
Carney, T 1998, 2000 ‘Protection, Populism and Citizenship’, Law in Context. vol 17 no.2 pp. 54-76
Carney, Terry 2003, ‘Mental Health Law in Postmodern Society: Time for New Paradigms?’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol.10, no.1, pp.12-32.
Carney, Terry et al. 2007, ‘Mental health tribunals:”TJ” implications of weighing fairness, freedom, protection and treatment’, Journal of Judicial Administration vol 17 pp. 46-59
Chesters, Janice 2005, ‘Deinstitutionalisation: an unrealised desire’, Health Sociology Review, vol.14, no. 3. p.272.
Council of Australian Governments (COAG), 2006, National Mental Health Plan on Mental Health 2006-2011,COAG, Canberra.
Dawson, John 2005, Community Treatment Orders: International Comparisons, New Zealand Law Foundation, Otago University Press, NZ.
Dawson, John 2006, ‘Fault-lines in community treatment order legislation’, Law and Psychiatry, vol. 29, pp. 482-494.
Delaney, S 2003, ‘An Optimally Rights Recognising Mental Health Tribunal – What Can Be Learned From Australian Jurisdictions’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol.10, no.1, pp.71-84.
Diesfeld, K 2003, ‘Insight: unpacking the concept in mental health law’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol.10, no.1, pp. 63-70.
Diesfeld, Kate & McKenna, Brian 2007, ‘The unintended impact of the therapeutic intentions of the New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal. Therapeutic Jurisprudence perspective’, Journal of Law and Medicine vol. 14 p. 566.
Kate Diesfeld 2003, ‘Introduction’ in Kate Diesfeld and Ian Freckelton (eds), Involuntary Detention and Therapeutic Jurisprudence, Aldershot: Ashgate, p. 3.
Doessel, Darrel P et al. 2005, ‘Australia’s National Mental Health Strategy and deinstitutionalisation: some empirical results’, Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 39, pp. 989-994.
Freckelton, I 2003, ‘Mental Health Review Tribunal Decision-making: A Therapeutic Jurisprudence Lens’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 44-62.
Gerrand, Valerie 2005, ‘Can deinstitutionalisation work? Mental health reform from 1993 to 1998 in Victoria, Australia’, Health Sociology Review, vol. 14, no. 3, p. 255
The International Disability Alliance position paper online: http://psychrights.org/Countries/UN/IDACRPDpaperfinal080425.pdf, last viewed 13 October 2008.
The Interim Report of the Special Rapporteur on Torture, and materials from an expert seminar on torture and persons with disabilities, online: http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/disability/torture.htm, last viewed 13 October 2008.
Kress, Ken 1999, ‘Therapeutic Jurisprudence and the Resolution of Value Conflicts: What can we realistically expect, in practice, from theory?’ Behavioural Sciences and the Law, vol. 17, pp. 555-588.
Lesser, J 2004, ‘All care and whose responsibility?’ Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 236 - 243.
Lesser, J 2007, ‘Review and Decision-making for Persons with a Serious Mental Illness: Achieving Best Practice’, The Winston Churchill Memorial Trust of Australia, Melbourne.
Mental Health Council of Australia 2003, Out of Hospital, Out of Mind, Mental Health Council of Australia, Canberra.
Mental Health Review Board 2007, Mental Health Review Board: Annual Report 2007, Department of Human Services, Melbourne.
Minkowitz, T 2006, No-Force Advocacy by Users and Survivors of Psychiatry, Mental Health Commission, Wellington.
Nygh, PE & Butt, Peter (eds) 1998, Butterworths Concise Australian Legal Dictionary, 2nd ed, LexisNexis Butterworths, Australia.
Office of the Chief Psychiatrist 2005, Community Treatment Orders: Chief Psychiatrist’s Guidelines, Mental Health Branch, Department of Human Services, Melbourne.
Our consumer place 2008, Welcome to our consumer place, viewed 21 August 2008.
Perlin, Michael 1999, ‘‘Half-Wracked Prejudice Leaped Forth’: Sanism, pretextuality, and why and how mental disability law developed as it did’ in Symposium, Rethinking Mental Disability Law: Resolving Old Issues in a New Millenium, Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues 3.
Perlin, Michael 2000, The Hidden Prejudice: Mental Disability on Trial, American Psychological Society, Washington DC .
Perlin, Michael 2003, ‘Preface’ in Kate Diesfeld and Ian Freckelton (eds), Involuntary Detention and Therapeutic Jurisprudence, Aldershot: Ashgate, pp xxiii- xxxv.
Punch, K 1998, Introduction to Social Research. Quantitative and Qualitative Approaches, Sage, London.
Rees, N 2003, ‘International Human Rights Obligations and Mental Health Review Tribunals’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 10, no. 1, pp 33-43.
Richmond, Kate & Savy, Pauline 2005, ‘In sight, in mind: mental health policy in the era of deinstitutionalisation’, Health Sociology Review, vol.14, no. 3. p. 215.
Savy, Pauline 2005, ‘Outcry and silence: the social implications of asylum closure in Australia’, Health Sociology Review, vol. 14, no. 3. p.205.
Senate Select Committee on Mental Health, 2006. A National Approach to Mental Health-From Crisis to Community, Senate Select Committee on Mental Health, Canberra.
Tait, David 2003, ‘The Ritual Environment of the Mental Health Tribunal Hearing: Inquiries and Reflections’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 91-96.
Tyler, T 1996, ‘The Psychological Consequences of Judicial Procedures: Implications for Civil Commitment Hearings’ in Wexler, David B & Winick, Bruce J (eds), Law in a Therapeutic Key: Developments in Therapeutic Jurisprudence, Carolina Academic Press, Durham, North Carolina.
Webb, David 2005, ‘Bridging the spirituality gap’, Australian e-Journal for the Advancement of Mental Health (AeJAMH), vol. 4, no. 1.
Wexler, David B 1992, ‘Putting Mental Health into Mental Health law: Therapeutic Jurisprudence’, Law and Human Behavior, vol. 16, no. 1.
Wexler, David B 2000, ‘Therapeutic Jurisprudence: An Overview’, Thomas M. Cooley Law Review, vol. 17, no. 1. pp.125-134.
Whiteford, Harvey A & Buckingham, William J 2005, ‘Ten years of mental health service reform in Australia: are we getting it right?’, Medical Journal of Australia, vol. 182, no. 8. pp. 396 – 400.
Winick, Bruce J 1994, ‘The Right to Refuse Mental Health Treatment: A Therapeutic Jurisprudence Analysis’, International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, vol. 17, no.1, pp. 99-117.
Winick, Bruce J 1997, ‘The Jurisprudence of Therapeutic Jurisprudence’, Psychology, Public Policy and Law, vol. 3, no.1,March,pp. 184-206.
Bibliography
Arrigo, Bruce 2003, ‘The Ethics of Therapeutic Jurisprudence: A Critical and Theoretical Enquiry of Law, Psychology and Crime’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol.11, no.1, pp. 23-43.
Ayres, R 1999, ‘ The Mental Health Review Board’ , paper presented at the Mental Health Review Board Forum at RANZCP Congress, Perth, Western Australia, 12 April 1999.
Beaupert, F 2005, ARC Project on Mental Health Tribunals - Preliminary Mapping of Administration and Processes (Report to ARC Project Steering Group), University of Sydney, Sydney.
Bisogni, Maria 2002, ‘What is the role of a Legal Representative before the Mental Health Review Tribunal?’, Law Society Journal, vol 40 no. 10, pp. 72 - 74.
Boerma, B 1992, ‘Bridge Over Troubled Waters, The Mental Health Review Tribunal & The Contribution of Social Workers’, AASW N.S.W Branch Newsletter, 1, pp. 22-24.
Carney, Terry & Beaupert, Fleur 2008 'Mental Health Tribunals: Rights drowning in un-“chartered” health waters?' 13(2) Australian Journal of Human Rights 181-208.
Carney, Terry, Tait, David & Beaupert, Fleur 2008 'Pushing the Boundaries: Realising rights through mental health tribunal processes?' 30(2) Sydney Law Review 329-356.
Churchill, R 2006, International experiences of using community treatment orders, Institute of Psychiatry, London.
Diesfeld, Kate & McKenna, Brian 2006, ‘The Therapeutic Intent of the New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol.13, no.1.
Foulks, E F 2000, ‘Advocating for Persons Who Are Mentally Ill: A History of Mutual Empowerment of Patients and Profession’, Administration and Policy in Mental Health, vol. 27, no. 5, pp. 353 - 367.
Freckelton, I 2005, ‘Distractors and Distressors in Involuntary Status Decision-making’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 88-102.
Freckelton, I 1999, ‘The New Duty to Warn’, Alternative Law Journal, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 17-29.
Geller, Jeffrey, L. et al. 2006, ‘Involuntary out-patient treatment as “deinstitutionalised coercion”: the net-widening concerns’, International Journal of Law and Psychiatry , vol. 29, pp. 551-562.
Goffman, E 1961, Asylums: essays on the social situation of mental patients and other inmates, Penguin Books, London, England.
Harvey, Carol A & Fielding, John M 2003, ‘ The configuration of mental health services to facilitate care for people with schizophrenia’, Medical Journal of Australia ,178, s49-s52.
Lammers, John & Happell, Brenda 2004, ‘Mental health reforms and their impact on consumer and carer participation: a perspective from Victoria, Australia’, Issues in Mental Health Nursing, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 261-276.
McDonnell, Elizabeth & Bartholomew, Terry 1997, ‘Community Treatment Orders in Victoria: Emergent Issues and Anomalies’, Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, vol. 4, no.1. pp. 25-36.
Mental Health Legal Centre 2006, 20-20 Hindsight: A History of the Mental Health Legal Centre Inc., Melbourne.
Office of the Health Services Commissioner 2004, Health Services Commissioner 2004 Annual Report, Department of Human Services, Melbourne.
Office of the Health Services Commissioner 2006, 2006 Annual Report, Office of the Health Services Commissioner, Here for all Victorians, Department of Human Services, Melbourne.
Pearson, M 2004, ‘Representing the mentally ill: the critical role of advocacy under the Mental Health Act 1986’, Alternative Law Journal, vol. 29, no. 4, pp.174-179.
Peay, Jill 1989, Tribunals on Trial: a study of Decision making Under the Mental Health Act 1983, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Perkins, E 2003, Decision-Making in Mental Health Review Tribunals, Athenaeum Press, Gateshead.
Rosen, A 2006, ‘The Australian experience of deinstitutionalization: interaction of Australian culture with the development and reform of its mental health services’, Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, vol.113, suppl. 429, pp. 81-89.
Rosenman, S, Korten, A & Newman, L 2000, ‘Efficacy of Continuing Advocacy in Involuntary Treatment’, Psychiatric Services, vol. 51, no. 8, pp.1029-1033.
Stolle, Dennis P, Wexler, David B, Winick, Bruce J & Dauer, Edward A. 1997, ‘Integrating Preventative Law and Therapeutic Jurisprudence: A Law and Psychology Based Approach to Lawyering’, California Western Law Review, vol. 34. pp. 15-52.
Wexler, David B & Winick, Bruce J 1992, ‘Therapeutic jurisprudence and criminal justice mental health issues’, Mental & Physical Disability Law Report, March-April.
Winick, BJ 1992, ‘On Autonomy: Legal and psychological perspectives’, Villanova law Review, vol. 37.
Winick, BJ 2005, Civil commitment: a therapeutic jurisprudence model, Carolina Academic Press, Durham, North Carolina.
