Shaping the Future of Mental Health Policy and Legislation in Northern Ireland: The Impact of Service User and Professional Social Work Discourses

This paper explores the complex interrelationship between service user and professional social work discourses and provides a critical commentary on their respective contributions to the recent review of mental health policy and legislation in Northern Ireland. The analysis indicates that dominant trends in mental health care, as mediated through service structures and institutional identities, have tended to prioritize the more coercive aspects of the social work role and reinforce existing power inequalities with service users. It is argued that such developments underline the need for a ‘refocusing’ debate in mental health social work to consider how a more appropriate balance can be achieved between its participatory/empowering and regulatory/coercive functions. Whilst highlighting both congruence and dissonance between respective discourses, the paper concludes that opportunities exist within the current change process for service users and social workers to build closer alliances in working together to reconstruct practice, safeguard human rights and develop innovative alternatives to a traditional bio-medical model of treatment.

An Evaluation of the Dual Diagnosis (substance use and mental health )Strategy in the South Eastern Trust Workers and Service Users Perceptions of Dual Diagnosis Issues

In the UK it is estimated that over 33% of psychiatric patients with enduring mental illness have a substance misuse problem, whilst over 50 % of clients currently accessing drug and alcohol services have a mental health problem. Between 2003 and 2013 in Northern Ireland, there were 741 recorded suicides by patients who were in contact with mental health services. Of this number, 68% (n=501) had a history of either alcohol or drug misuse or both, resulting in an average of 46 patient suicides per year associated with dual diagnosis (University of Manchester 2015).
The current evaluation examined staff attitudes towards working with dual diagnosis (co-existing difficulties) issues, staff confidence in working with clients with dual diagnosis, workers’ perceptions of the South Eastern dual diagnosis strategy and service user perspectives of dual diagnosis service provision.
The purpose of the evaluation was to provide evidence regarding the following in accordance with the current dual diagnosis strategy;
Staff understanding of the concept of dual diagnosis,
Staff attitudes towards working with dual diagnosis,
Staff confidence in working with individuals, who present with dual diagnosis,
Service users’ perspectives of SE Trust provision for dual diagnosis.
Staff views on the South Eastern Trust Dual Diagnosis Strategy.

Deciding to Detain: The Use of Compulsory Mental Health Law by Social Workers

Critical commentary

Young People and Mental Health, Policy and Research Review

This brief focuses on issues relating to young people’s mental health. It draws on published research evidence and discussion at a Roundtable event organised by YouthAction Northern Ireland (YANI) and ARK and held in December 2012. Roundtable participants included officials from a number of government departments, Health Trusts, representatives from a range of NGOs, academics, and young people from YouthAction Northern Ireland’s Right Here Fermanagh
project and Young Men Talking Project who opened the debate with a contribution on what they think is important for young people’s mental health. The event was conducted under the anonymity of reporting allowed under the Chatham House Rule to encourage open debate.

Championing the interface between mental health and child protection: evaluation of a service initiative to improve joint working in Northern Ireland

The importance of establishing effective interagency working between adult mental health services and child care services in order to safeguard children has been repeatedly identified by research, policy, inquiries and inspection reports. This article reports on the evaluation of an initiative in one Health and Social Care Trust in Northern Ireland that aimed to facilitate joint working and so improve service provision and protection for children and families. The Champions Initiative involved identifying a champion in each multi-disciplinary community mental health team and in each family and child care team who would have responsibility for providing information, promoting joint working and identifying any obstacles to better co-operation. The evaluation of this initiative assessed levels of experience, training, confidence, understanding and awareness in the Champions and their team members at baseline. The Champions and their Team Leaders were then followed-up after six months to obtain their qualitative views of the impact of the initiative. The results include comparisons between mental health and child care staff, and crucially, views about whether the initiative has had any impact on working together. This study also generated recommendations for further service development in this complex and important area of practice.

An international comparison of legal frameworks for supported and substitute decision-making in mental health services

There have been important recent developments in law, research, policy and practice relating to supporting people with decision-making impairments, in particular when a person’s wishes and preferences are unclear or inaccessible. A driver in this respect is the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD); the implications of the CRPD for policy and professional practices are currently debated. This article reviews and compares four legal frameworks for supported and substitute decision-making for people whose decision-making ability is impaired. In particular, it explores how these frameworks may apply to people with mental health problems. The four jurisdictions are: Ontario, Canada; Victoria, Australia; England and Wales, United Kingdom (UK); and Northern Ireland, UK. Comparisons and contrasts are made in the key areas of: the legal framework for supported and substitute decision-making; the criteria for intervention; the assessment process; the safeguards; and issues in practice. Thus Ontario has developed a relatively comprehensive, progressive and influential legal framework over the past thirty years but there remain concerns about the standardisation of decision-making ability assessments and how the laws work together. In Australia, the Victorian Law Reform Commission (2012) has recommended that the six different types of substitute decision-making under the three laws in that jurisdiction, need to be simplified, and integrated into a spectrum that includes supported decision-making. In England and Wales the Mental Capacity Act 2005 has a complex interface with mental health law. In Northern Ireland it is proposed to introduce a new Mental Capacity (Health, Welfare and Finance) Bill that will provide a unified structure for all substitute decision-making. The discussion will consider the key strengths and limitations of the approaches in each jurisdiction and identify possible ways that further progress can be made in law, policy and practice.