The changes to information you should already be familiar with. The introduction of new ideas, which by definition, you may not be familiar with! nor aware of..
AS IS PROCESS "CURRENT OPERATING MODEL"
We’ll do this relevant section by relevant section: section number (what it currently relates to in today’s act) – followed by a description of how it may be changed.
Just to pick out a few things from all of the above! – the handover process for s136 is something I was asked to do specific work on. It is important we get that right because two things are at risk: officers being retained in health-based places of safety for hours or days on end, purely because no-one commissioning the service worked out how to staff those facilities at all. Equally, there are examples around of police officers leaving vulnerable, sometimes challenging, patients in health-care settings when the NHS are not ready, willing or able to manage them and we know this has led to assaults on NHS which are undefendable. Striking the balance is vital because both things are intolerable and in fairness, striking this balance has always been required by the Royal College of Psychiatrists Standards on the use of Section 136 (2011; 2013) and I suggested to Professor Wessely that between now and the introduction of any new Act, the NHS and police will need to ensure that all s136 PoS provision gets to those 2011 standards to allow for the removal of police custody as a Place of Safety. By the time we learn the 2019 figures for the use of police custody, my guess is we will have just a double-digit number of detainees from custody so it’s nearly there anyway.
Many of the most frustrating problems in policing today relate to officers sitting for hours and hours, if not days, waiting for beds to be identified to which patients can be admitted. The welcome focus on s140 is a positive thing, not least because I’m going to a workshop in Manchester in eight days’ time about how we start to make this legal duty something which turns in to meaningful practice in the real world, impacting upon the (roughly) 4,500 unlawful detention in police custody pending beds being found. It should be borne in mind that this is the figure of delays following criminal arrest; there will be more following use of s136 MHA. (If the Cabinet Office estimates of one problem in every two admissions, that means another 2,500 unlawful detentions. This problem needs fixing, but as per my original post on this report, my worry is not about the certain necessity of the proposal, but on whether the services can be resourced or changed to ensure the non-legal matters are attended to in such a way as to mean this will work.
The Emergency Department proposal is interesting! – apart from the need for clarity in ED, one particular problem has always been the capacity of ED staff and / or their security contractors, to actually restrain people. The proposal in the report is expressly couching this new power as being something to allow ED to handle these situations without calling the police. This will need some careful understanding and defining as things go forward, because by amending the MCA 2005, they are amending legislation which does not direct its authority at particular professions or organisations. It will be perfectly possible after this proposal becomes law, for NHS staff to make the argument that the police should give effect to the compulsion they’ve decided to authorise. Keep an eye on this one as it could be an example of what I highlighted in the first blog – that unless we do this stuff carefully, even well-intentioned reform will increase reliance upon the police to administer the coercive side of the (mental) healthcare system.
culled from https://mentalhealthcop.wordpress.com/2018/12/08/inside-the-wessely-review/
As a Tip" remember the 5 abbreviations below to help you understand the process under the Mental Health Act/Obligations.
D-Detention and/or Discharge