Jai’s story – Inverclyde.
Jai was referred to Circles Network by his Mental Health Officer (MHO).The MHO had earlier advised him that they wanted to apply for a change to his Compulsory Treatment Order (CTO). At this point he told his MHO that he wanted the support of an advocate through the process.
Jai had received Circles Network support during an earlier admission to hospital when he was subject to measures under the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003. He had built up a trusting relationship with his previous advocate and requested that the MHO ask for that person by name. The MHO agreed to this and made the introduction on Jai’s behalf.
Circles Network always work hard to meet the needs of individual requests and so Jai was appointed the advocate he requested.
Jai had been living at home for quite some time following a long admission to hospital. His mental health was well maintained by his medication, which he agreed, and he also had a care plan that provided him two hours of daily support from Richmond Fellowship.
Jai was taking a prescribed a medication that required close monitoring by regular blood tests.
When routine tests of Jai’s blood showed abnormal results – the medication Jai had been receiving had to be withdrawn.
It had been keeping him well.
It had offered him a chance at life outside of hospital and without repeat admissions.
Despite Jai’s willingness to return to hospital, the multidisciplinary team decided an application to vary and extend the CTO was necessary. Jai sought support from his advocate to contact the legal firm who had also represented him previously.
An appointment was made for his solicitor and advocate to make a joint visit to Jai. At this meeting the three of them discussed the circumstances which led up to his admission to hospital. It became evident that Jai had complied with all conditions within his order, and that it was an unfortunate set of circumstances which meant his medication had to be withdrawn due to their side effects.
The solicitor suggested independent medical evidence, which may support Jai’s request to remain a voluntary patient on the ward, whilst a review of medication was being performed and alternative treatments initiated. Jai was of the opinion that he should be able to remain on the ward voluntarily until his medication was changed and titrated to therapeutic levels. Jai had good insight into his illness, and thought he should be afforded the responsibility to take more control of his illness, instead of all the decisions being taken by his clinical team.
The solicitor assisted Jai to arrange a meeting with the Responsible Medical Officer (RMO) and multidisciplinary team.
In preparation for the meeting, Jai’s advocate helped him to put his views regarding his treatment down on paper. In particular, his desire to remain on the ward informally without the need for variation to his CTO.
When the meeting took place Jai’s treatment, medication, care plan and his legal status were discussed. Jai’s RMO, MHO and multidisciplinary team were able to take full account of Jai’s views and agreed that they were willing to allow Jai to remain in hospital as an informal patient.
They would leave the CTO as it was without varying it to a hospital-based order.
