Programme misled listeners over the Mental Health Act
RE: Jeremy Vine, BBC R4, May 18.
I believe that listeners were led to believe in this programme that it can be very difficult for relatives to have someone sectioned, even if opinions are based on facts that are correct, because the Mental Health Act is so rigorous.
In fact though, I think it’s more likely that it’s because there is a lack of resources, for example not enough beds, and the Mental Health Act remains very open to abuse.
The mental health team don’t have to find it all that difficult if they have some other reason, for example they fear a patient may complain about them, they could soon find a bed for them then.
The Mental Health Act clearly states that they can have someone sectioned for 28 days if they believe that this person is in some kind of danger and it’s something that can be said far too easily on pretences.
The Mental Health Act doesn’t state that if they are going to use force to detain someone then these opinions have got to be based on facts that are correct.
It can go on anyone’s say so, for example they don’t have to look at letters that it’s been alleged the patient has written, they can take the complainant’s word for it, and there’s no other way around it that’s simple and straightforward. There can be a very thin line between going by hearsay and they themselves actually making up the information.
I am afraid though that they have to be treated like the clergy were in Ireland, they are not human, and it is not accepted that any of them would do such a thing and be in any way corrupt or biased.
If anyone can think of any other reason why the government ministers refused to put this amendment into the Mental Health Act, that opinions have got to be based on facts that are correct, then, and said it could be left to trust then I would love to hear it. Glenys Ann Stockport however, who suggests that money currently paid to the EU should be used directly to fund projects in the UK and in particular the NHS, is part of a government who have made massive cuts to public spending, overseen the opening of food banks and is ideologically opposed to the NHS.
How much money would make its way to Stockport and how long before the NHS is finally packaged up and privatised?
The EU is not perfect and there are many issues, but remaining a member of the community that secures human and workers’ rights, is challenging climate change and supporting environment and wildlife protection, will allow us to bring about change.
If we leave now it will give a boost to movements and parties in this country who thrive on scapegoating the less fortunate in society, in particular immigrants.
People from the UK have the right to move to Europe to live, work and study. Young people in particular should be able to continue to do this and are more likely to vote to stay in.
Our decision therefore is very important as it will affect the young most.
I suggest therefore, that we should vote to remain and work together to make a better Europe. Deborah Hind Bramhall