LETTERS: The goal is to keep mentally ill patients out of institutions

Elaine Murphy,Louis Blom-Cooper,Helen Hally
Wednesday 18 January 1995 19:02 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Professor Elaine Murphy and others Sir: We would like to correct the misunderstanding by Liz Sayce of Mind and Neil Confrey (Letters, 17 January) that the South Devon Inquiry team recommended compulsory medical treatment in people's homes. We are asstrongly opposed to that as Mind, and almost all other organisations in the mental health field. All our recommendations are designed around improving patient choice and access to high-quality, appropriate services.

Our proposals for a Community Care Plan Order bear many similarities to Tessa Jowell MP's private members bill. We agree that the priority should be given to delivering better, comprehensive mental health services. Compulsory treatment should only be given in the context of a total care plan, and our proposals call for greater rather than lesser controls on the conditions in which compulsory treatment can be given.

Our proposals would allow treatment only at designated medical facilities. Is it not much more preferable to treat people who must receive treatment without the requirement to first detain them, often unnecessarily, in a hospital?

Yours faithfully, ELAINE MURPHY LOUIS BLOM-COOPER HELEN HALLY Division of Psychiatry and Psychology Guy's and St Thomas's Medical School London, SE1

18 January

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in