This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost. Let us know if you find any major problems.
Text in this format is not official and should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
Health and Social Security Scrutiny Panel
Record of Meeting
Date: 21st March 2018
Present | Deputy R. Renouf , Chairman Deputy G. Southern , Vice-Chairman [Item 2] Deputy J. Hilton Deputy T. McDonald Senator S. Ferguson |
Apologies |
|
Absent |
|
In attendance | Senator A. Green, Minister for Health and Social Services [Item 2] Mr I. Dyer, Head of Policy and Quality Improvement, Health Department [Item 2] Mr F. Le Gros, Legal Adviser, Law Officers' Department [Item 2] Mr T. Leveridge, Scrutiny Officer |
Ref Back | Agenda matter | Action |
15/03/18 Item 4 | 1. Organ Donation The Panel discussed a draft of its report including draft key findings and recommendations. The Panel agreed to agree a final draft of its report by email on Monday 26th March. It agreed to publish its report on Tuesday 27th March. |
|
20/02/18 Item 1 | 2. Mental Health Regulations The Panel met with the Minister for Health and Social Services and his officials. The meeting was held following concerns raised by the Independent Advocacy Jersey (IAJ) – a part of MIND Jersey - about the ability of independent mental health advocates ("MHAs") to act in relation to and on behalf of qualifying patients. The Head of Policy and Quality Improvement explained what consultation the Department had undertaken on the draft Law and the subsequent Regulations. He explained that the Department had held a "dialogue day" in 2014 at which IAJ were present. The Department conducted a consultation on the draft Law in 2015. Following this, a report summarising the consultation responses was published. The Official reported that the Department had been in dialogue with MIND Jersey throughout the consultation period. During the consultation period, discussions were had about whether statutory advocacy should be provided to voluntary or non-detained patients. The Department decided that this was not necessary as other safeguards would be built in for these patients. In the Law, qualifying patients were, therefore, defined as a patient liable to be detained in an |
|
| approved establishment and a patient subject to guardianship. This would not include voluntary patients. The safeguards for voluntary patients included the provision of a "nearest person" who could represent the patient. This could be anyone from a family member to an advocate. The Official explained that voluntary patients would not have access to a statutory advocate because the patient could leave the establishment if they chose to do so. The Official said that a review group had been set up to review the Law and the Regulations and suggest amendments to the Minister should they be required. Following the meeting the Panel requested a meeting with MIND Jersey. | KB |