Disabled men fail to prove neglect
Claims for compensation for three intellectually disabled men who sued the government alleging ill treatment while in care have been knocked back on all fronts.
Justice Rebecca Ellis had heard a six-week case brought by human rights lawyer Tony Ellis for three men with IQs under 70 and health problems such as deep vein thrombosis, epilepsy and brain damage, bipolar disorders, personality disorders and autism.
He claimed they had been ‘‘warehoused’’ for years, neglected and discriminated against in forensic mental health facilities while in secure units in Auckland and Porirua, along with sexual abuse and prolonged seclusion.
They were seeking between $325,500 for Patient X and $232,500 for Patient Y and Z. Their identities are suppressed.
They had been made special patients after coming before the courts on violence charges. One has been in care for 17 years, one for 14, and the third was released after 13 years. They sued the Waitemata and Capital & Coast district health boards, the attorneygeneral, the Mental Health Review Tribunal, and a district inspector, who denied the claims.
The judge dismissed all the claims yesterday, finding no evidence on many.
‘‘The three applicants have, throughout their time in compulsory care, received dedicated and compassionate care from dedicated and compassionate staff,’’ she said.
‘‘It is accepted that, on occasion, certain things could have been done better. But the very real, albeit slow, progress made by each of the applicants, in his own way, speaks for itself.
‘‘So it is ... important to record that I remain entirely unpersuaded that any one of the staff members who has cared for these three men over the years has ever been motivated by anything other than the men’s best interests.
‘‘I have not before come across such a devoted group of medical professionals, committed to caring for, and improving the lives of those such as the applicants, often under difficult and dangerous circumstances.’’
Tony Ellis said their ill treatment stemmed from failing to provide humane care, treatment and rehabilitation, failing to treat them with dignity and respect, and failing to have a proper complaints procedure or a method by which they could seek release breaching their liberty under the Bill of Rights.
‘‘They are treated worse than prisoners. Mr Z, and Mr X (and Mr Y before he was released to live in the community) were being subjected to indefinite imprisonment,’’ Ellis said.
He said they were denied the right to have relationships, procreate or even properly explore their sexuality.
Lawyer Dale La Hood, for the DHBs, said each claimant posed a serious danger to other people because of their propensity to assault others.
After the judgment was published, Nigel Fairley, Capital & Coast DHB’s mental health, addictions and intellectual disability general manager, said he agreed with the judge about the dedication and compassion of the staff caring for the men.
Jeremy Skipworth, clinical director of Waitemata DHB’s Mason Clinic, said the focus was always on rehabilitation and the court had recognised the therapeutic outlook was in no way compromised when caring for patients with intellectual disabilities.