Hi all.
I'm looking for info re people who have been placed in resi care having been discharged from a s3 MHA 1983 order. I'm sure that I have read somewhere that in this circumstance s117 is applicable for the whole package of care. I'm doing some s117 reviews and a manager is arguing that meds like psychotropics, lithium, anti-depressants and the like (mental health medication) are s117 eligible whilst more general meds are not so if a service user with lets say severe arthritis and alzhiemer's is discharged from a s3 order to a resi placement. For the sake of argument lets say they have methatrexate for the arthritis is this covered by s117 aftercare as a part of the overall package? Is it covered only if they are also having meds for the Alzhiemer's or is it just not coverd by s117 provisons at all?
If anybody can also point me to case law (as s117 is a bit of a minefield) that would be especially welcome.
Regards
Barry.
See DH NHS continuing healthcare practice guide para 4.13 'the individual might have or develop physical health needs which are distinct from the section 117 needs, and which separately constitute a primary health need'
See DH NHS continuing healthcare practice guide para 4.13
'the individual might have or develop physical health needs which are distinct from the section 117 needs, and which separately constitute a primary health need'
You have to decide that if P did not have the treatment/care would this have an adverse effect on his mental health and/or might it lead to a readmission to a MH unit; if so it could be covered by 117 if not it probably isn't.
In Stennett aftercare is defined:
In Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority [1998] QB 978, 992 Beldam LJ observed on behalf of the Court of Appeal:
"After-care services are not defined in the Act of 1983. They would normally include social work, support in helping the ex-patient with problems of employment, accommodation or family relationships, the provision of domiciliary services and the use of day centre and residential facilities."
It is common ground that this was a correct description. It is agreed that caring residential accommodation is within the scope of section 117(2).
Although there is case law on who is responsible I don't know of any case law, after Stennett, that considers what comes under 117 and what doesn't. But perhaps someone else does.