Re TB

[2007] QMHC 37

MENTAL HEALTH COURT

CITATION:

Re TB  [2007] QMHC 037

PARTIES:

APPEAL BY TB AGAINST A DECISION OF THE MENTAL HEALTH REVIEW TRIBUNAL

PROCEEDING:

No 256 of 2006

DELIVERED ON:

13 February 2007

DELIVERED AT:

Brisbane

HEARING DATE:

13 February 2007

JUDGE:

Philippides J

ASSISTING PSYCHIATRISTS:

Dr J M Lawrence
Dr J F Wood

FINDINGS AND ORDER:

The appeal is dismissed

CATCHWORDS:

MENTAL HEALTH – CONFINEMENT AND RESTRAINT OF MENTALLY ILL PERSONS AND SIMILAR ORDERS – GENERALLY – where appeal against a decision of the Mental Health Review Tribunal confirming involuntary treatment order in respect of appellant – where appellant submitted that he ought not to be on the medication he had been placed on and that he was not being treated at the most appropriate place – where appellant suffered from schizophrenia –  where Tribunal considered that appellant suffered from a serious mental illness, lacked insight and would not continue with prescribed medication unless subject to an involuntary treatment order – whether decision of the Tribunal should be set aside 

Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld), s 14, s 191

COUNSEL:

J Farmer for the appellant

J Tate for the Director of Mental Health

SOLICITORS:

Legal Aid Queensland for the Defendant
Crown Law for the Director of Mental Health

PHILIPPIDES J:

1. This is an appeal against the decision of the Mental Health Review Tribunal confirming an involuntary treatment order in respect of the patient.  The notice of appeal sets out the grounds of appeal.  They include that the patient ought not to be on the medication that he has been placed on and also that the more appropriate place of treatment is Rockhampton. 

1. The Court has the benefit of written submissions and also the submissions that have been made on behalf of the appellant by his legal representative.  The evidence indicates that the appellant suffers from schizophrenia and has suffered from that condition for some considerable time.  He is currently an inpatient at the Baillie Henderson Hospital, having been referred initially from the Rockhampton Mental Health Service.

1. The evidence upon which the Tribunal acted included clinical expert evidence that the appellant suffered from a serious mental illness, that he lacked insight, that without an involuntary treatment order he would not continue with prescribed medication and that, in those circumstances, it was most likely he would suffer a worsening of his condition and be a risk to others and to himself.  There is a history of threats regarding suicide, particularly following the death of his mother, and a risk to others.  The appellant clearly lacks the capacity to consent to treatment and unfortunately the material indicates that he simply is unwilling to accept that he needs treatment for his condition.

1. I consider that the Tribunal did appropriately take into account the criteria required under the legislation as set out in section 191(4) of the Mental Health Act 2000 and I am unable to see any basis for setting aside the decision of the Mental Health Review Tribunal. Its decision is supported by the report of Dr Stephens which is also endorsed by the opinions offered by the assisting psychiatrists.

1. The decision of the Tribunal is therefore confirmed and the appeal is dismissed.