validity of a section 20 detention renewal
the challenge:
Urgent advice was required in relation to a section 23 manager’s
hearing, which was already in session. A patient had queried
if the section 20 renewal was valid, on the basis that section
20(5) required the responsible medical officer (RMO) to consult
with one or more persons and the report did not state if this had
been complied with.
our approach:
We took urgent instructions from the lay manager and advised
that the hearing be adjourned for a short period of time to enable
the requirements of section 20(5) to be checked. We
researched the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Code of Practice but
could not find any specific guidance or relevant case-law. We
advised that there was not a strict requirement for the report to
state if section 20(5) had been complied with and suggested
adjourning the hearing until the RMO could be contacted to
ascertain whether he had consulted with others. If compliance
with section 20(5) could not be established, then the patient would
need to be discharged.
the result:
Comprehensive advice provided in extremely short timeframe,
enabling hearing into patient’s detention to proceed with minimum
disruption.