Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T08:17:27.081Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Do we need community treatment orders in Ireland?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

Dermot Walsh
Dermot Walsh*
Affiliation:
Mental Health Research Unit, Research Board, Knockmaun House, 42-47 Lower Mount St, Dublin 2, Ireland
*
*Correspondence Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objectives: Re-admissions to inpatient psychiatric care are now so frequent as to be designated the ‘revolving door’ phenomenon and constitute 72% of admissions to Irish inpatient psychiatric units and hospitals. It is commonly believed that treatment non-adherence with aftercare following inpatient discharge contributes to readmission. Attempts to improve adherence and reduce or shorten readmission through compulsory community treatment orders have been made in several countries including Scotland in 2005 and, from November 2008, England and Wales. Provision for conditional discharge in Ireland has already been furnished by the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 but has been compromised by the inability to impose enforcement of conditions. The paper aims to determine whether compulsory community treatment orders are effective in improving adherence and reducing re-admission and whether, in consequence, their introduction in Ireland should be considered.

Method: The legislative measures adopted to improve treatment adherence and thereby reduce re-admissions are presented. The evidence of their effectiveness is examined.

Results: Evaluation of the effectiveness of community treatment orders is limited and hindered by confounding factors. What evidence there is does not provide convincing evidence of their utility.

Conclusions: It is concluded that there is insufficient evidence to advocate their early introduction in Ireland in civil mental health legislation. Instead a wait and see policy is suggested with critical assessment of the outcome of such developments in Scotland and England and Wales. In addition further research on the characteristics of revolving door patients in Ireland and the circumstances determining their readmission is advocated. There is an anomaly in the Criminal Law (Insanity) Act 2006 which allows of conditional discharge but does not provide for its enforcement.

Keywords

Community treatment ordersEffectivenessSuitability for Irish mental health services
Type
Perspective
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 27 , Issue 2 , June 2010 , pp. 90 - 96
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Daly, A, Doherty, DT, Walsh, D. Re-admissions to Irish psychiatric units and hospitals 2001-2003. HRB Research Series. Dublin: Health Research Board, 2007.Google Scholar
2. An Act to amend the Laws relating to Private and District Lunatic Asylums in Ireland. (11th August 1975).Google Scholar
3.Lawton-Smith, S. A Question of Numbers The potential impact of community-based treatment orders in England and Wales. London: King's Fund, 2005.Google Scholar
4.Department of Health. Green Paper on Mental Health. Dublin: The Stationery Office, 1992.Google Scholar
5.Department of Health. White Paper. A New Mental Health Act. Dublin: The Stationery Office, 1995.Google Scholar
6.Lawton-Smith, S. Community-based Compulsory Treatment Orders in Scotland. London: King's Fund, 2006.Google Scholar
7.Lawton-Smith, S, Dawson, J, Burns, T. In Debate. Community treatment orders are not a good thing. Br J Psychiat 2008; 193: 96–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Jethwa, J, Galappathie, N. Community Treatment Orders BMJ 2008; 337: a613.Google Scholar
9.Hunt, AM, da Silva, A, Lurie, S, Goidbloom, D. Community Treatment Orders in Toronto: the emerging data. Can J Ppsychiat 2007; 52: 10.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Gibbs, A, Dawson, J, Ansley, C, Mullen, R. How patients in New Zealand view community treatment orders. J Ment Health 2005; 14(4): 357–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Churchill, R. International experiences of using community treatment orders. London: Institute of Psychiatry, Kings College, 2005.Google Scholar
12.Franklin, D, Pinfold, V, Bindman, J, Thornicroft, G. Consultant psychiatrists' experiences of using supervised discharge. Psychiat Bull 2000; 24: 412–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
13.Kisely, S, Campbell, LA. Methodological issues in assessing the evidence for compulsory community treatment. Curr Psychiat Rev 2007; 3: 51–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Burgess, M, Bindman, J, Lesse, Met al.Do community treatment orders for mental illness reduce readmission to hospital? An epidemiological study. Soc Psychiat and Psychiat Epidem 21006; 41: 574–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Segal, SP, Burgess, PM. Conditional Release, a less restrictive alternative to hospitalisation? Psychiat Serv 2006; 57: 1600–1606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
16.New York State Office of Mental Health. Kendra's Law. Final Report on the status of assisted outpatient treatment. New York: State Office of Mental Health, 2005.Google Scholar
17.Kisely, S, Campbell, LA, Preston, N. Compulsory community and involuntary outpatient treatment for people with severe mental disorders. Cochrane Database of Systematic reviews. 2005. Issue 3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.A Vision for Change. Report of the Expert Group on Mental Health Policy. Dublin. The Stationery office, 2006.Google Scholar
19. The High Court Judicial Review [2007 No. 1517 J.R.]Google Scholar
20. The High Court Judicial Review [2008 No. 749 J.R.]Google Scholar