R sessay v south london and maudsley nhs foundation trust

Therefore, although the officers considered that the claimant came within the scope of s MHA, they could not rely on that provision, and as she was on private premises, s MHA did not apply.

If appropriate control measures are not available or possible, it must not be used. The court noted that the absence of a purpose to humiliate and debase the person concerned could not conclusively rule out a finding of a violation of Article 3.

It also includes powers that can be used if it is considered that an informal patient except a community patient might leave the hospital before there is time to complete an application under either ss. The claimant brought proceedings against the police and the hospital, claiming that she had been unlawfully detained.

Detention and custody

Officers and staff should carry out searches with respect and dignity. Mentally disordered persons found in public places This academic partnership enables the Trust to develop new treatments and to provide specialist services to people from across the UK such as the National Psychosis Unit at Bethlem Royal Hospital.

England and Wales High Court (Queen's Bench Division) Decisions

The second clinic had believed the applicant would be charged and remanded in custody for assault, and that its assessment would be required only after charge. The search, the extent of the search and the subsequent retention of any article that the detainee has with them, depend on the decision made by the custody officer.

The custody officer must fully explain the reason s for the search.

Damaged mattresses and blankets may be more easily torn by a detainee to make into a ligature. The material parts of section 6 provide as follows: Immediately after placing a detained person into a cell, custody staff should document in the custody record that the cell has been checked, that it meets the required standards and that the cell call system is in full working order.

It was common ground that there had been no consultation on the second occasion, but the AMHP relied on s11 4 b of MHA which excuses such consultation if it would cause unreasonable delay.

Thus it was not until the fourth morning that the applicant was finally transferred in handcuffs to the clinic and admitted, some hours after the expiry of the hour period allowed for in s Where an urgent strip search is conducted of a young person prior to the arrival of an appropriate adult, officers must record the justification along with what action has been taken to secure the immediate attendance of an appropriate adult.

Conduct of searches The custody officer should explain to the detainee why they are being searched and is responsible for the safekeeping of any property taken from the detainee.

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust

There is a framework or protocol agreed with the relevant local authorities and NHS Trusts governing s procedures, identifying designated places of safety, together with contact details for Approved Mental Health Practitioners and acute mental health services; All FMEs perhaps via the organisation that supplies them understand the demands that may be made of them in the custody suite under s, and have access to the framework; and Duty inspectors, shift sergeants and custody sergeants have confirmed that they are aware of, and know how or where to access, the framework or protocol.

If the person is detained in a cell, they should be monitored and observed according to the risk assessment, ie, at level 3 constant supervision or level 4 close proximity. Critics say restraints are potentially traumatic even life threatening for patients. The AMHP had stayed on site at the hospital to do another assessment after the one in question, and it would have been reasonable for her to wait longer before by-passing this important statutory requirement.

This was far from a one-off situation: The 'Automated MRI' software automatically compares or benchmarks someone's brain scan image against others, each showing varying stages of Alzheimer's disease. The Claimant brought proceedings against the Commissioner of Police for the Metropolis, the Second Defendant, in respect of the actions of the police officers.

The aim is to diagnose illness more effectively and much earlier, assess which treatments will work best for an individual and then tailor the care they receive accordingly.

Sections 11, 12 and 13 are material to the present case. Officers must follow the safeguards in PACE to protect vulnerable people and children.

Medical Law Reports

They provide, as relevant, as follows: Its aim is to speed up the pace that latest medical research findings are turned into improved clinical care and services. Subject to approval by the court the Claimant and the Second Defendant have agreed that the following declaration be made: The aftermath of the Sean Rigg inquest, and the focus on the role of the Metropolitan Police Service MPS in his death, has again shone the spotlight on the thorny issue of policing and mental health care.

Conclusion The facts of MS betray a wider, systemic problem.R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust [] EWHC (QB) The police entered the claimant's private accommodation, unaccompanied and without a s warrant, purporting to be acting under ss 5 - 6 MCA in her best interests; she was taken to hospital and, after a hour delay in the s suite, detained under s2 MHA.

AM v (1) South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust & (2) The Secretary of State for Health. I agree with the point made by the SSH to Upper Tribunal Judge Jacobs that my references to the MHA having primacy in J v Foundation Trust were made in and should be confined to the application of Case E in that case.

R (Sessay) v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust [] Med LR DIVISIONAL COURT Before Lord Justice PITCHFORD, and Mr Justice SUPPERSTONE. CV v South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust [] EWHC (Admin) (1) In cases involving consultation under s11(4), the AMHP is to be judged according to the circumstances as they appear to her at the time.

South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust rated Good by CQC South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust (SLaM) has achieved a Good overall rating by the Care Quality Commission (CQC). The CQC also conducted a well-led inspection where the Trust was rated Good.

Free legal content from LexisNexis Butterworths: All England Reporter Cases - R (on the application of Sessay) v South London & Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and another - .

R sessay v south london and maudsley nhs foundation trust
Rated 3/5 based on 46 review