Passing police detention powers to NHS staff ‘could cause significant harm'
In March, the Government suffered several defeats in the Lords as peers debated ways to modernise mental health legislation.
Conservative shadow health minister Lord Kamall proposed a change to the Mental Health Bill so that nurses, doctors and other staff could carry out detentions of patients without the need for police officers to attend incidents.
Health minister Baroness Merron told the Lords the Government did not support 'extending police powers in this way' but peers backed the Conservative proposal, resulting in changes to the draft new law.
The changes mean powers previously reserved only for police could be transferred to health or other professionals to detain and restrain people in crisis, in public spaces or at home.
It comes after concerns have repeatedly been raised by police leaders about the pressures mental health issues are placing on policing.
Launching a joint statement, major health organisations have expressed 'grave concerns' and argue the 'police play a crucial role in carrying out many tasks that medical practitioners cannot perform, such as assessing whether a home is safe to enter'.
They said 'reducing police involvement in mental health emergencies could lead to serious risks for both patients and clinicians.'
The joint statement said wording accompanying the amendment 'states that 'the proposed amendments would remove the need for the presence of police at mental health incidents in the absence of any risk.'
'This is misleading as instances of detentions under the Mental Health Act where there is no risk are almost non-existent.
'It also negates the fact that the mere presence of uniformed officers can ensure that an otherwise risky situation remains contained and safe.'
Transferring police powers to health professionals also risks damaging their 'therapeutic relationships' with patients, the signatories said.
This has the 'double-effect' of hindering the ability to provide care, while also deterring people from seeking help from services where they might be forcibly detained, they added.
The organisations said the changes 'have not been tested' with health professionals or discussed with patients.
Their statement said: 'We are keen to work with police and Government to find ways to improve responses to mental health crises to ensure the safety of all professionals involved, patients and the community.'
Dr Lade Smith, president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, said delegating police powers to health professionals 'would not be within the spirit' of the proposed reforms to the Mental Health Act.
She added: 'It is well known that at times, people experiencing a mental health crisis cannot be safely reached and cared for without the assistance of the police.
'Delegating police powers without proper consultation or planning is likely to disproportionately affect those from minoritised backgrounds and would increase risk to patients and compromise the safety of others. It sets a dangerous precedent.
'Like mental health services, the police are facing significant workload pressures.
'It is simply logical and now vital that we work together to develop more effective ways of responding to mental health crises.'
A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: 'Extending police powers to other professionals would represent a major shift in the roles, responsibilities and practice for health and care staff and would place additional resource on an already stretched NHS at a time where we are trying to rebuild a health service fit for the future.
'It also raises questions around whether it is right for the health and social care professionals to have powers to use reasonable force which could have implications for patient, public and staff safety, as well as potentially damaging the relationships clinicians have with patients.
'We are grateful to health and social care stakeholders for their in-depth engagement on this complex issue.'
Signatories to the joint statement are:
– Association of Ambulance Chief Executives (AACE)– Association of Directors of Adult Social Services (ADASS)– Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) Leads Network– British Association of Social Workers (BASW)– British Medical Association (BMA)– College of Paramedics– Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM)– Royal College of Nursing (RCN)– Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Ministers have a duty to protect freedom of speech and end this insanity
The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht is a collection of essays edited by Susan Dalgety and Lucy Hunter Blackburn. Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... As is often the case during the Edinburgh Fringe, the material was weak and the delivery unconvincing. While authoritarian bullies rampaged across Scotland's cultural landscape last week, the response from senior politicians was predictably - depressingly - poor. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In saner times, an apology from a publicly-funded venue for allowing the Deputy First Minister to enter the premises would have provoked justifiable outrage from the very top of Government. Likewise, the decision to ban a book from an exhibition at the National Library of Scotland would, surely, have seen the personal intervention of the First Minister. Instead, last week we witnessed yet more of the lack of leadership which has allowed trans activists to wreak havoc across the public sector. First, and I cringe for those involved as I type these words, we learned that management at the Summerhall venue in Edinburgh set up a 'safe space' for staff and performers while Deputy FM Kate Forbes was in the building. The presence of Forbes, a devout Christian who previously revealed that, had she been an elected member at the time the law was changed, she would have voted against gay marriage, was dangerous. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Deputy First Minister Kate Forbes (Picture: Andrew Milligan/PA Wire) Management at the venue later apologised for letting her in. 'Summerhall Arts' primary concern,' said a spokesperson, 'is the safety and wellbeing of the artists and performers we work with, and going forward we will be developing robust, proactive inclusion and wellbeing policies that would prevent this oversight in our bookings process happening again.' This is insanity. Kate Forbes is a democratically elected politician whose faith-born opposition to gay marriage, while controversial, is perfectly legal. Her presence in Summerhall created no danger for anyone, LGBTQ+ or otherwise, and those claiming otherwise should be embarrassed. The only danger, here, is in Summerhall management's attack on free speech. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Another enthusiast for undermining this fundamental freedom is National Librarian, Amina Shah. It emerged last week that the excellent book 'The Women Who Wouldn't Wheesht' had been withdrawn by Shah from an exhibition highlighting the importance of libraries and the ways in which they can 'empower individuals and the communities they belong to'. The editors of the book, a collection of essays by women involved in the ultimately successful campaign to defeat the SNP's plan to allow anyone to self-identify into the legally-recognised sex of their choosing, discovered through a freedom of information request that it had received more public nominations for inclusion that any other. They learned that the book had, initially, been selected for inclusion in the 'Dear Library' exhibition but that, after protests from members of staff, Shah - with the backing of the board, chaired by Sir Drummond Bone - withdrew it. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Shah's actions are indefensible and stand fully in contradiction to the responsibilities that come with the position she is unfit to hold. I suspect the National Librarian's decision is one that will whisper in her ear for years to come. Faced with threats of disruption from staff if 'The Women Who Wouldn't Wheest' had been included in the exhibition, Shah should have turned to the National Library's disciplinary code. Rather than capitulating to authoritarian bullies, she should have reminded them that gross misconduct is a real thing with real consequences. As these twin scandals unfolded, finance secretary Shona Robison spoke of the need for 'tolerance'. In her reaction to the Summerhall scandal, Robison revealed at least some of the reason that we find ourselves where we do. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'I don't think,' said Robison, 'it sends out the right signal over freedom of speech.' Any weaker and the pulse would be undetectable. Something that sends out entirely the wrong signal over freedom of speech is members of the Government sitting back while others deny the free speech of others. When culture secretary Angus Robertson eventually spoke up, he served a weak cocktail of bromides. While he was a 'strong supporter' of free speech, there would always be 'tensions' between that right and views that some people might find 'unpopular or unjustifiable'. It would not, he added, 'be easy all of the time to please everybody'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad On Robertson waffled: he was a strong supporter of freedom of speech and expression; there was an important distance between government and cultural organisations; there were issues of 'public concern' and 'public debate'. Over the two decades that I've known former journalist Robertson, I've always considered him - in common with most in our trade - a fundamentalist on freedom of speech. His unwillingness to take a stronger stance, here, does not chime with the values I've long understood him to hold. Robertson spoke about the important distance between government and cultural organisations and it is, of course, correct that ministers should have no say in the decision making of bodies such as Creative Scotland but that does not mean he should not intervene when things are going catastrophically wrong. Robertson is entitled to demand the presence in his ministerial office of Summerhall chief executive Sam Gough. The culture secretary is perfectly within his rights to point out to Gough that Summerhall - a venue recently propped up with more than £600,000 of public money - must operate within the law and that failure to do so will mean the tap's turned off. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The National Library of Scotland is funded by the Scottish Government and answerable to the Scottish Parliament. Robertson has the right - the duty - to act here, too. Amina Shah, cowed by activists, removed a book from an exhibition that includes, satire fans, George Orwell's '1984'. She's a censor and Angus Robertson should sack her and remove Sir Drummond Bone from the library's board. Freedom of speech is under attack as never before in living memory. The culture secretary's presence on the frontline of this battle would be very much appreciated.
Daily Record
3 hours ago
- Daily Record
Alex Salmond's widow suing government over botched sexual harassment probe into late husband
Moira's determination to pursue the case has been galvanised by criticism of her late husband in Nicola Sturgeon's book. Alex Salmond's widow has appointed a team of lawyers and reactivated the former first minister's legal action against the Scottish Government. Moira's determination to pursue the case has been galvanised by criticism of her late husband in Nicola Sturgeon's book which was published last week. A KC, two junior counsel and a lead investigator are now in place with finance for the court battle secured. A family friend said: 'Moira is upset and angered by the continued attempts to smear Alex in the book – much of which is ridiculous and inaccurate. 'It has only strengthened her resolve to make sure that the full truth comes out and that Alex's name is cleared.' Salmond had been in the process of suing the government over its botched probe into sexual harassment complaints against him. The case could be devastating for Sturgeon's political legacy as it rev-olves around claims senior figures close to her colluded to destroy Salmond over fears he was planning a return to frontline politics in 2018. The action was frozen when the ex-SNP leader died of a heart attack in North Macedonia in October last year, aged 69. However Moira has now been appointed executor of his estate allowing her to hire a legal team and reactivate proceedings. The family friend added: 'Her case against the Scottish Government is now live, the legal team is in place, the finance in place and this will be going ahead, no question of that. 'Alex may not be here to defend himself but his family are determined to stand up to those who continue to attack him. 'There is an adjustment period ongoing until September where updates can be made by either side to their paperwork, it takes time but the ball is rolling. Anyone who thinks this is just going to go away is wrong.' Rich pals of Salmond are understood to be prepared to bankroll the case in a bid to expose the full truth behind the most explosive episode. In her memoir Frankly, Sturgeon denied the existence of a conspiracy to destroy her former boss. She accused him of failing to show any contrition for his 'inappropriate' behaviour towards women. In 2020, Salmond was cleared of 13 sexual offence charges, including attempted rape. He also won a legal case against the Scottish Government over its handing of complaints against him and won over £500,000. The judicial review of a government probe into his conduct was found to have been 'tainted by apparent bias'. Sturgeon writes that Salmond 'would have rather destroyed the SNP than see it succeed without him.' She added: 'He impugned the integrity of the institutions at the heart of Scottish democracy – government, police, Crown Office. He was prepared to traumatise, time and again, the women at the centre of it all.' Moira, 88, has asked for the attacks to stop and said they have caused the family 'great distress'. She said: 'Attacks by the living on the dead will seem to many as deeply unfair. My wish, and sincere hope, is that these attacks will now stop.' Join the Daily Record WhatsApp community! Get the latest news sent straight to your messages by joining our WhatsApp community today. You'll receive daily updates on breaking news as well as the top headlines across Scotland. No one will be able to see who is signed up and no one can send messages except the Daily Record team. All you have to do is click here if you're on mobile, select 'Join Community' and you're in! If you're on a desktop, simply scan the QR code above with your phone and click 'Join Community'. We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose 'exit group'. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice. The case accused the government of misfeasance – a civil law term meaning the wrongful exercise of lawful authority. The government previously vowed to defend itself 'robustly' in court. However an out of court settlement could also be possible. Salmond's lawyers previously claimed that Holyrood officials had acted 'improperly, in bad faith and beyond their powers with the intention of injuring' the former SNP leader. Before he died, the Alba founder warned of a 'day of reckoning'. Conservative MP David Davis has said that he believes a plot to discredit his close friend caused huge stress and that it could also have been a factor in his death. He said: 'I want to see this exposed so the Scottish Government is forced to answer the questions that it ought to answer.' Salmond took the SNP from a fringe party in the 90s to complete dominance in Scottish politics. He left to lead Alba after the sexual harassment claims sparke d a bitter dispute with Sturgeon.
North Wales Live
4 hours ago
- North Wales Live
DWP explains how it will stop people fraudulently claiming £749 monthly payment
The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has recently confirmed it remains "committed" to combating fraud and error within the benefits system, including recouping debts arising from Personal Independence Payments (PIP). Conservative MP Sir John Hayes questioned the DWP about what measures it is implementing to "tackle people fraudulently claiming PIP". In a written reply, DWP Minister Andrew Western outlined fresh measures being rolled out to "prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen". This encompasses "introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts". Mr Western stated: " DWP is committed to tackling fraud and error in the benefits system and to the recovery of debts, including those generated by Personal Independent Payments. Working closely with counter fraud experts, the DWP has introduced measures to prevent fraud entering the system based on the types of cases and trends we have seen," reports the Daily Record. New DWP measures to tackle benefit fraud These include: Strengthening the Identity and Verification Process to prevent fraudulent cases entering the system Introducing more rigorous checks for customers changing personal details, including bank accounts Delivering awareness sessions for Case Managers and Healthcare Professionals, reinforcing action to take when suspicious cases are identified - for example, fake documents The Minister continued: 'DWP is delivering against key counter fraud activity, including investing in counter fraud professionals and building data analytical capabilities. The new Fraud, Error and Debt Bill will bring forward new measures to tackle fraud in the system. 'Details on the measures the Government will be legislating will be presented to Parliament in due course.' The DWP pays benefits to nearly 24 million people across Great Britain, including 3.7m on PIP. The latest DWP report shows £330m was lost to fraud and error in the PIP system last year, up from £90m in 2023/24. Fraud and error in the welfare system cost the taxpayer £9.5bn in overpayments last year, compared to £9.7bn in 2023/24. Fraud This guidance on explains that this relates to claims where all three of the following conditions apply: the conditions for receipt of benefit, or the rate of benefit in payment, are not met the claimant can reasonably be expected to be aware of the effect on their entitlement benefit payment stops or reduces as a result of a review of the claim. Claimant error These are overpayments where claimants have provided inaccurate or incomplete information, or failed to report a change in their circumstances which has led to an overpayment, but there is no evidence of fraudulent intent on the claimant's part. Official error This is where benefits have been paid incorrectly due to a failure to act, a delay or a mistaken assessment by the Department, a local authority or His Majesty's Revenue and Customs, to which no one outside of that department has materially contributed, regardless of whether the business unit has processed the information. PIP changes in circumstances There are several changes in circumstances people receiving PIP must tell the DWP about or risk losing their benefit entitlement and having regular payments paused or stopped. It's important to be aware that changing your name, doctor, health professional or address do not need to be reported to the DWP and will have no impact on your payments or your award - but it is worthwhile ensuring the details DWP holds on file is up to date. However, leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even just for a holiday - may affect entitlement. Guidance in the current edition of the PIP Handbook on states: 'This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. We will need to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad.' If you're due to travel abroad over the next few weeks, make sure you contact the DWP with the details they have asked for as soon as possible - and keep it in mind when booking for summer holidays this year. How to report a change of circumstances to DWP Contact the PIP enquiry line on 0800 121 4433 to report a change of circumstances - lines are open from 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday. Changes to daily living or mobility needs You should tell DWP if, for example, you need more or less help or support or the condition will last for a longer or shorter time than you previously told DWP about. This change may affect entitlement to PIP, the amount and the period of the PIP award. Leaving the country or planning to leave the country for a period of more than four weeks - even if this is a holiday This change may affect the claimant's entitlement to PIP. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant is leaving the country, how long they are planning to be out of the country, which country they are going to and why they are going abroad. Stays in hospital or similar institutions DWP guidance states both components of PIP cease to be payable 28 days after the claimant is admitted to an NHS hospital. Privately funded patients are unaffected by these rules and can continue to be paid either component of PIP. If a claimant is in hospital or a similar institution at the date entitlement to PIP starts, PIP is not payable until they are discharged. Care homes The daily living component of PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days of residency in care home where the costs of the accommodation are met from public or local funds. The PIP mobility component can continue to be paid. People who fully self-fund their placement are unaffected by these rules. If a claimant is in a care home at the date of entitlement, the PIP daily living component is not payable until they leave. Linked spells in hospital and a care home Spells in hospital are linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. The daily living component for spells in a care home is also linked if the gap between them is no more than 28 days. There is no link for the mobility component because payment is not affected when in a care home. Both components of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in hospital. The daily living component of PIP will stop being paid after a total of 28 days in a care home. If a claimant moves between a hospital and care home, or the other way around, these periods will also link. Imprisonment or claimant held in legal custody This change may affect the amount of PIP that can be paid to the claimant. The DWP needs to know the date the claimant was taken into prison or legal custody and the length of time they are expected to be there, if known. Detained in legal custody PIP ceases to be payable after 28 days where someone is being detained in legal custody. This applies whether the offence is civil or criminal and whether they have been convicted or are on remand. Suspended payments of benefit are not refunded regardless of the outcome of proceedings against the individual. Two or more separate periods in legal custody link if they are within one year of each other. Change of name This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP, but it is important the DWP has the most up-to-date details for the claimant. This change needs to be reported in writing - if the claimant phones to give these details, the DWP will ask for these details to be put in writing. The written notification must contain: full details of their previous name their new name details of any changes made to the bank or building society account into which PIP is paid, such as the name of the account or the account number their signature on the letter Change of account PIP is paid into The DWP needs full details of the of the name and address of the new bank or building society along with details of the new account including the name of the account, the account number and the sort code or roll number. Change of person acting for the claimant This refers to an appointee or someone with power of attorney for the claimant. This change is important so the DWP can make payments to the right person at the right time. They need the full name, address and contact details of the new person who is acting for the claimant. If the person acting for the claimant has moved or has different contact details, the DWP just needs the new details. Change of address This change, providing it is not a hospital or nursing home will not affect eligibility or payment of PIP. It is important the DWP hold the most up-to-date details for the claimant. They need full details of the new address the claimant has moved to, including the postcode and the date they moved. Change of doctor or healthcare professional This change will not affect payment or eligibility for PIP and is not mandatory once a decision on the PIP claim has been made. However, if the change happens during the claiming stage it is essential the DWP have the most up-to-date information. This will make sure the assessment provider has the right contact details to gather any further details they may require. The DWP needs the full name, address and contact details of the new doctor or health care professional. online handbook here.
