This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/health/6762355.stm

The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 1 Version 2
Mental care bill back in Commons Mental care bill back in Commons
(about 19 hours later)
MPs are debating controversial moves to allow mentally ill people in England and Wales to be detained, even if they have not committed crimes. The government has bowed to pressure over its controversial plans to detain untreatable mentally ill people by agreeing extra safeguards on powers.
Minister Rosie Winterton has outlined amendments made to the Mental Health Bill, in an effort to get it through Parliament after years of wrangling. It had faced opposition from MPs and campaigners to its Mental Health Bill, which would allow people to be detained to protect themselves or the public.
She says the changes, being debated by MPs over two days, balance the need for treatment with public safety. It has agreed to a compromise proposal ensuring that any compulsory treatment must be of "therapeutic benefit".
But some say they will lead to too many people being locked up unnecessarily. The Bill will return to the Lords which has already inflicted several defeats.
Ministers have been trying to update mental health legislation since 1998. Labour MP Chris Bryant suggested the "treatability test" compromise during a two-day Commons debate. He said psychiatric units should not become "prisons by another name" and said mentally ill people had the right to appropriate treatment.
After a string of defeats in the House of Lords, the government has given some ground on the bill, which amends the Mental Health Act 1983. "We cannot simply wash our hands of them. We cannot just be detaining people for the purspose of detaining them. There has to be some kind of therapeutic benefit," he said.
The Tories welcomed the move and Health Minister Rosie Winterton told MPs that mental health organisations had urged her to back the amendment.
She said it was a good compromise, as it was based on the purpose of medical treatment - "it does not turn on the likelihood of treatment achieving that purpose".
The bill which would allow people with severe personality disorders to bedetained, if judged to be a threat, was introduced after several high profile murders involving people suffering from mental health problems.
The government says it balances the need for treatment with public safety, but it has been criticised for being too draconian.
If approved in the Commons later, it will go back to the House of Lords which has already inflicted a series of defeats on the government over the bill.
The government has already outlined a series of amendments in an effort to get it through Parliament. Ministers have been trying to update mental health legislation since 1998.
Advocacy rightAdvocacy right
Opening the debate, Mental Health Minister Rosie Winterton pledged to consult "very fully" on the bill, and outlined new plans to give people detained under mental health laws access to advocacy services. Concessions include new plans to give people detained under mental health laws access to advocacy services and to allow under-18s held in adult institutions to be treated in "age appropriate settings".
"Patients must know they have a right to advocacy and we have provided that they are told both orally and in writing," she said.
She also told MPs concerned that the bill would allow under-18s to be held in adult institutions, that they would have to be treated in "age appropriate settings".
We must make sure we have a bill that does address, as well as getting treatment of people, the issues of public safety Rosie WintertonHealth ministerWe must make sure we have a bill that does address, as well as getting treatment of people, the issues of public safety Rosie WintertonHealth minister
And if under-16s were held, they would not be expected to be there for more than 48 hours and local health managers and the Department of Health would have to be notified, she said. But they have stuck by the plans to allow doctors to issue supervised community treatment orders, which would force patients to take medicine and place them under detention if required.
But she said ministers would not back down on plans to allow doctors to issue supervised community treatment orders, which would force patients to take medicine and place them under detention if required.
The aim is to ensure that patients receive treatment to prevent the risk of harm to themselves or to protect other people.
'Unpopular bill'
Speaking ahead of the debate, health minister Rosie Winterton told BBC News the orders would be subject to strict conditions.
Despite concessions the Conservatives, the Liberal Democrats and some backbench Labour MPs are still likely to vote against the bill.
Concerns include the need for guidance on who can decide when to impose community treatment orders.
HAVE YOUR SAY In a democracy, people are innocent until proven guilty, which includes the mentally ill Julie, US Send us your comments
Shadow health minister Tim Loughton said: "Labour have failed to listen to psychiatrists who warned that this unpopular bill will leave vulnerable mental health patients without access to treatment."
But during the debate he said he welcomed the move to introduce advocates, but needed to be convinced it would be adequately funded and not just a "token effort". And he welcomed proposals on the treatment of under-18s.
Independent MP Richard Taylor said that there was a "gap" in the bill about the need for consultation with patients, family and carers before a community treatment order was made.
'Allay fears'
And while Liberal Democrat MP John Pugh said he was not against community treatment orders in principle, he said there were some "real dangers".
Mr Pugh said the legislation should require evidence that it was likely the "voluntary route" would not work and the "involuntary route" would, in order to "allay fears".
The bill would also give the victims of violent mental health offenders the chance to be informed when their attacker is to be released from hospital after treatment for mental illness.
The shake-up in the law has been driven by Michael Stone's 1998 conviction for the murders of Lin and Megan Russell.The shake-up in the law has been driven by Michael Stone's 1998 conviction for the murders of Lin and Megan Russell.
Stone was regarded as a dangerous psychopath and it had been assumed he was not held under mental health powers because his condition was considered untreatable.Stone was regarded as a dangerous psychopath and it had been assumed he was not held under mental health powers because his condition was considered untreatable.
This was subsequently found not to be the case as he was receiving treatment but gaps in his care meant he was not given the correct treatment.This was subsequently found not to be the case as he was receiving treatment but gaps in his care meant he was not given the correct treatment.