Detained by mental health but culpable for what you say?

[Donald Trumps]

For once I am with notwell on this. There is some jumping to conclusions going on that appears unjustified.

 

The first is that having a mental illness equates to lacking mental capacity. That is not true. The two do not coincide, except in a few cases.

 

"Insanity" is a defence and indicates lack of capacity to make decisions and to form the necessary mental element, or intention, to commit a crime, any mental illness that falls short of the legal definition of "insanity" is not a defence and could only be used as mitigation.

 

There is also an second assumption that the defendant was compulsorily detained at Grainagh Court, but the report, right or wrong, doesn't say that. A lot of the people at GC are there as voluntary patients, either in or out. But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing and that it is wrong. very few patients lose their decision making capacity. They are being treated. You wouldn't assume that someone being treated for a physical illness lost capacity.

 

The police, social workers and medical/nursing staff can have a very difficult time when dealing with challenging people, with illnesses, addictions etc. Each case is no doubt decided on its merits, whether to prosecute, or not, whether to section or not, remove to a place of safety or not. Hopefully it is proportionate to what has happened and what is needed.

 

I've no idea why this case was taken to court, I wasn't involved, or why the sentence was imposed, but I can think of several good reasons why it might have been.

 

Say the person had a history of poor family circumstances, addictions, self harm, personality disorder but was not ill enough to be detained, but in the community did not follow treatment plans. Well a probation order could assist in organising somewhere to live, regular meetings, ensuring attendance a treatment appointments.

 

 

Anyone 'sectioned' is highly unlikely to be of 'sound mind & body' JW

[thommo2010]

 

For once I am with notwell on this. There is some jumping to conclusions going on that appears unjustified.

 

The first is that having a mental illness equates to lacking mental capacity. That is not true. The two do not coincide, except in a few cases.

 

"Insanity" is a defence and indicates lack of capacity to make decisions and to form the necessary mental element, or intention, to commit a crime, any mental illness that falls short of the legal definition of "insanity" is not a defence and could only be used as mitigation.

 

There is also an second assumption that the defendant was compulsorily detained at Grainagh Court, but the report, right or wrong, doesn't say that. A lot of the people at GC are there as voluntary patients, either in or out. But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing and that it is wrong. very few patients lose their decision making capacity. They are being treated. You wouldn't assume that someone being treated for a physical illness lost capacity.

 

The police, social workers and medical/nursing staff can have a very difficult time when dealing with challenging people, with illnesses, addictions etc. Each case is no doubt decided on its merits, whether to prosecute, or not, whether to section or not, remove to a place of safety or not. Hopefully it is proportionate to what has happened and what is needed.

 

I've no idea why this case was taken to court, I wasn't involved, or why the sentence was imposed, but I can think of several good reasons why it might have been.

 

Say the person had a history of poor family circumstances, addictions, self harm, personality disorder but was not ill enough to be detained, but in the community did not follow treatment plans. Well a probation order could assist in organising somewhere to live, regular meetings, ensuring attendance a treatment appointments.

 

Anyone 'sectioned' is highly unlikely to be of 'sound mind & body' JW

where in the article does it say she was sectioned?

[Donald Trumps]

 

I find this confusing.

A lady is detained by mental health services, staff admit she's had the biggest melt down she's ever had, she is being supervised for her own protection, yet somehow she's deemed to be responsible and lucid enough to be done for making racist remarks.

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/isle-of-man-news/woman-guilty-of-racial-abuse-1-8258014

Clearly not mental enough then?

The whole thing is completely ridiculous and should never have reached a court of law. The prosecution should be thrown in prison for wasting public money. This is another fine example of institutional and personal bigotry and discrimination against mental illness, apparently the last acceptable form of bigotry.

 

 

I agree

 

Unless there was real physical harm & the necessity for a legal decision/opinion, I see no reason for issues in a mental wellbeing institution to come to court

[Donald Trumps]

 

 

For once I am with notwell on this. There is some jumping to conclusions going on that appears unjustified.

 

The first is that having a mental illness equates to lacking mental capacity. That is not true. The two do not coincide, except in a few cases.

 

"Insanity" is a defence and indicates lack of capacity to make decisions and to form the necessary mental element, or intention, to commit a crime, any mental illness that falls short of the legal definition of "insanity" is not a defence and could only be used as mitigation.

 

There is also an second assumption that the defendant was compulsorily detained at Grainagh Court, but the report, right or wrong, doesn't say that. A lot of the people at GC are there as voluntary patients, either in or out. But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing and that it is wrong. very few patients lose their decision making capacity. They are being treated. You wouldn't assume that someone being treated for a physical illness lost capacity.

 

The police, social workers and medical/nursing staff can have a very difficult time when dealing with challenging people, with illnesses, addictions etc. Each case is no doubt decided on its merits, whether to prosecute, or not, whether to section or not, remove to a place of safety or not. Hopefully it is proportionate to what has happened and what is needed.

 

I've no idea why this case was taken to court, I wasn't involved, or why the sentence was imposed, but I can think of several good reasons why it might have been.

 

Say the person had a history of poor family circumstances, addictions, self harm, personality disorder but was not ill enough to be detained, but in the community did not follow treatment plans. Well a probation order could assist in organising somewhere to live, regular meetings, ensuring attendance a treatment appointments.

 

Anyone 'sectioned' is highly unlikely to be of 'sound mind & body' JW

where in the article does it say she was sectioned?

 

 

"But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing"

[John Wright]

 

For once I am with notwell on this. There is some jumping to conclusions going on that appears unjustified.

The first is that having a mental illness equates to lacking mental capacity. That is not true. The two do not coincide, except in a few cases.

"Insanity" is a defence and indicates lack of capacity to make decisions and to form the necessary mental element, or intention, to commit a crime, any mental illness that falls short of the legal definition of "insanity" is not a defence and could only be used as mitigation.

There is also an second assumption that the defendant was compulsorily detained at Grainagh Court, but the report, right or wrong, doesn't say that. A lot of the people at GC are there as voluntary patients, either in or out. But the fact they may be being treated under a section order does not mean that they are incapable of knowing what they are doing and that it is wrong. very few patients lose their decision making capacity. They are being treated. You wouldn't assume that someone being treated for a physical illness lost capacity.

The police, social workers and medical/nursing staff can have a very difficult time when dealing with challenging people, with illnesses, addictions etc. Each case is no doubt decided on its merits, whether to prosecute, or not, whether to section or not, remove to a place of safety or not. Hopefully it is proportionate to what has happened and what is needed.

I've no idea why this case was taken to court, I wasn't involved, or why the sentence was imposed, but I can think of several good reasons why it might have been.

Say the person had a history of poor family circumstances, addictions, self harm, personality disorder but was not ill enough to be detained, but in the community did not follow treatment plans. Well a probation order could assist in organising somewhere to live, regular meetings, ensuring attendance a treatment appointments.

 

 

Anyone 'sectioned' is highly unlikely to be of 'sound mind & body' JW

No, if they are sectioned they are either detained for assessment ( section 2 ) or treatment ( section 3 ) but the fact of being sectioned does not mean they lose mental capacity or lose the ability to control their actions and know the difference between right and wrong. Very few patients who are sectioned lack capacity. On the other hand many people who lack capacity never get sectioned or receive inpatient treatment at Grianagh Court.

 

But I do agree it's very unfortunate that things like this come into the public domain. I'd personally question the public interest in prosecuting and the possible effect on the health of the defendant.

[Albert Tatlock]

According to the report, she was refused permission to go outside for a fag.

 

I'd call that 'detained'.

[notwell]

Not really

[WTF]

Not really

 

no, he really would.

[thebees]

According to the report, she was refused permission to go outside for a fag.

 

I'd call that 'detained'.

 

20+ years ago I wanted to be a mental health nurse, I was sent to a care of the elderly ward at Ballamona on work experience. It was horrible, the incontinent patient was not allowed a cigarette because she'd wet herself & the carers were common (it's the only word, sorry), I should have been the change I wanted to see but I'm a chicken shit so I bailed and now...I'm a book keeper wow. The irony is, it's probably the meds they have her on that are making her want to smoke.

[gettafa]

If anyone causes damage or breaks something while in Grianagh Court, do they get done for it? Criminal damage and all that. Like these guys that do damage in the 'drunk tank' up the police station.

[John Wright]

If anyone causes damage or breaks something while in Grianagh Court, do they get done for it? Criminal damage and all that. Like these guys that do damage in the 'drunk tank' up the police station.

Yes. Wasn't someone charged with and convicted of criminal damage not so long ago

[thommo2010]

If anyone causes damage or breaks something while in Grianagh Court, do they get done for it? Criminal damage and all that. Like these guys that do damage in the 'drunk tank' up the police station.

yes they do

[rmanx]

 

If anyone causes damage or breaks something while in Grianagh Court, do they get done for it? Criminal damage and all that. Like these guys that do damage in the 'drunk tank' up the police station.

yes they do

 

 

But a self inflicted alcohol induced damage is not the same as a mental health induced damage is it?

[notwell]

It is if both are aware of what they are doing. Trying to excuse the actions of someone with some form of mental illness as definitely not being their fault (just because they are mentally ill) is weak.

[rmanx]

It is if both are aware of what they are doing. Trying to excuse the actions of someone with some form of mental illness as definitely not being their fault (just because they are mentally ill) is weak.

 

Really?

 

You are comparing mental illness to being drunk?

 

And what led you to that stunning observation? Your years of training and experience?