The Experience and Practice of Approved Social Workers in Northern Ireland

This article reports on the first extensive survey of Approved Social Worker (ASW) activity under the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986. The integrated health and social services organizational structure, the adverse effects on individual mental health of the legacy of thirty years of civil conflict and the move from hospital to community care are significant features which have influenced the delivery of mental health social work services locally. The practice and experience of ASWs was surveyed by postal questionnaire and user and carer experience of compulsory hospital admission was investigated by a series of focus groups. The study revealed that two‐thirds of ASWs had experience of acting as an applicant in compulsory hospital admission during the past two years. Nearly half (42 per cent) of these ASWs had reported experience of between one and five admissions and one‐tenth had completed over twenty admissions in the two‐year period. In only a small minority of cases did joint face‐to‐face assessment with the General Practitioner (doctor) take place; nearly half of ASWs reported difficulties in obtaining transport; and only one‐fifth of ASWs had experience of acting as a second approved social worker. Half of ASWs reported experience of guardianship, either as applicant or in making the recommendation. Both service users and carers reported a lack of understanding about the role of the ASW and complained about the lack of alternative resources that ASWs could use to prevent hospital admissions. These findings are discussed and a number of recommendations are proposed for improvements to approved social worker 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.