Consumers' experiences of rights-based mental health laws: Lessons from Victoria, Australia

Reasons behind the rise in involuntary psychiatric treatment under mental health act 2016, Queensland, Australia - Clinician perspectives

OBJECTIVE

Despite legislative reform to promote less restrictive treatment options, the rates of involuntary psychiatric treatment in Queensland, Australia continue to rise. This paper aims to investigate mental health clinicians' perspectives of reasons behind the high and increasing rates of involuntary psychiatric treatment in Queensland.

METHOD

Qualitative methodology was used to explore clinician perspectives by facilitating two face-to-face focus groups. Purposive sampling was used to select clinicians of multiple disciplines from inpatient and community adult mental health teams. Reflexive thematic analysis was utilised to analyse and interpret data.

FINDINGS

The findings suggested a broad consensus that involuntary treatment is over-utilised in public mental health services. Six main themes were identified, including risk aversion, systemic service deficiencies, lack of voluntary alternatives, increased substance use in the community, legislative and policy shortcomings, and barriers to enacting criteria in the legislation.

CONCLUSION

This paper highlights that legislative reform alone will be ineffective in reducing involuntary psychiatric treatment, and adequate resources, training, policy and culture change are necessary for successful implementation of less restrictive practices. The reforms require reorientation of the implementation of policy, as well as legislation to align the Queensland mental health system within a human rights framework.

From principles to practice: Clarifying new obligations under Victoria's Mental Health and Wellbeing Act 2022

OBJECTIVE

To explain the new test for complying with the mental health principles under the Mental Health and Wellbeing Act 2022 (Vic).

CONCLUSION

The principles carry over limitations from the previous Mental Health Act 2014 (Vic) while also containing new features. The 'all reasonable efforts to comply' and 'proper consideration' tests resemble the existing test under section 38(1) of the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) that also apply to public mental health services. Taking these duties together, public mental health services, including hospital and community mental health boards, clinical directors and clinical governance processes, will need to show concrete evidence of specific rights and/or principles being deliberated in their decisions.

Promoting and hindering factors in the use of advance statements by Australian mental health clinicians

WHAT IS KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Australia is a commonwealth of federated states and territories with each having unique mental health legislation. Victoria implemented advance statements based on legislation from overseas jurisdictions such as Scotland. The aim of this Victorian legislation was to underpin an individual's autonomy and decision-making in relation to treatment, particularly compulsory treatment. Advance statements allow individuals within the healthcare setting to document preferences for care and treatment during times of decompensated mental health, including informing nominated persons and preferences for recovery-oriented care; however, advance statements continue to attract barriers in their implementation and use. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: This paper focuses on legislation within one jurisdiction, Victoria, highlighting that several barriers to uptake exist, including uncertainty around the legal status of advance statements, the ideal setting to implement advance statements and concern around perceived consumer capacity to contribute to developing advance statements. There are substantial differences of opinion regarding adherence to treatment and recovery preferences contained within the advance statement, especially when decisions are made in the context of decompensated mental health. The Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) model has been used to formulate recommendations in several other health studies, but to date has not been used to provide recommendations for greater implementation of advance statements. Implementation science is a contemporary research translation movement that seeks to identify factors and strategies that influence the adoption and integration of interventions like advance statements in real world settings. For this study it has been useful to identify barriers, consider implementation strategies and link this with policy frameworks to support practice change. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: Our study revealed that real challenges exist for mental health clinicians in adopting advance statements despite them having a strong held intention to empower service users to play a greater role in their own treatment and care decisions. The facilitators identified in this study highlight the notion that advance statements, and the concept of supported decision-making are needed in contemporary mental health care. Implementation science can assist in identifying barriers and suggesting facilitators including enhanced training, incentivization of advance statement creation, and greater awareness of the overarching purpose and principle of advance statement creation. Continued support and training in implementing and maintaining advance statements is required if mental health clinicians are to drive the uptake of this important reform to mental health legislation. Training needs to be provided that will address attitudes, and strongly held beliefs that pose barriers to the use of advance statements.

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Advance statements, also known as advance directives or psychiatric wills, provide individuals the opportunity to document care and recovery preferences during a period of mental ill health. Although the use of advance statements has gained momentum, little research has explored the factors that promote or hinder further uptake.

AIM

To determine the factors that promote or hinder the uptake of advance statements.

METHOD

Cross-sectional online survey of healthcare workers (n = 190).

RESULTS

Promoting factors include high perceived value of advance statements, particularly their role in recovery focussed care, while hindering factors include disagreement or responsibility for advance statement creation and legal status.

DISCUSSION

This study indicates that several hindering factors or barriers to advance statement uptake remain, and until these factors are addressed future implementation is arguably hindered. In this paper, we have used the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) model to outline suggestions to address hindering factors to implementation and guide future implementation strategies for advance statement uptake and practice change.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The ongoing uptake of advance statements requires tailored implementation strategies address hindering factors. Strong promoting factors, such as the shared belief in the advance statement model and its role in recovery focused care, should be considered a strong foundation for implementation strategies.

What do we know about the experience of seclusion in a forensic setting? An integrative literature review

Seclusion is used in forensic and general mental health settings to protect a person or others from harm. However, seclusion can result in trauma-related harm and re-traumatization with little known about the experience of seclusion for consumers in forensic mental health settings from their perspectives. This article explores consumer experiences of seclusion in forensic mental health settings and explores the differences between female and male experiences of seclusion. Five electronic databases were systematically searched using keywords and variations of experience, attitude, seclusion, coercion, forensic mental health, and forensic psychiatry. Inclusion criteria were original peer-reviewed studies conducted in adult forensic mental health settings reporting data on the experiences of or attitudes towards seclusion. Seven studies met the criteria for inclusion and a quality assessment was undertaken. Results found consumers in forensic mental health settings perceive seclusion to be harmful, a punishment for their behaviour, and largely a negative experience that impacts their emotional health. Some consumers report positive experiences of seclusion. Differences in the experience of seclusion for females and males are unclear. Further research is required to understand the experience of seclusion for women in forensic mental health settings. Identification and consideration of differences in the experience of seclusion for males and females may assist in identifying sex-specific interventions and may inform policy and practices to eliminate or reduce the trauma associated with seclusion use.

A model for mental health advance directives in the new Victorian Mental Health and Wellbeing Act

Under the Victorian 2014 Mental Health Act (MHA14), Victorians have a right to advance statements. While there have been initiatives to support uptake, under 3% of consumers have done so. In March 2021, the Royal Commission into Victoria's Mental Health System (the Commission) released its report, including a call to repeal MHA14 and enact a new Act no later than mid-2022. In this paper, we discuss the role of advance planning documentation and instruments used in Australian legislation. Drawing on the Commission's recommendations, models of advance planning in Australia and the Victorian legislative context, this paper proposes a model of both binding and non-binding advance directives. This model would bring the rights of Victorian consumers into alignment with rights provided under the Medical Treatment, Planning and Decisions Act 2016 (Vic) and assist in bringing the new Act into compatibility with the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic).