Psychiatry cannot be allowed to dominate debate on Mental Health Act
Let's be clear: the Mental Health Act, 2001 will continue to allow people to be involuntarily confined and force treated. Let's also have some clarity that under the current system, mental health outcomes are very far from satisfactory. Indeed, despite the now accepted deconstruction of 'mental illness' as simply a diagnostic construct, this system is now largely upheld because of legislative frameworks.
It begs the question, should those within the system and seeking to uphold it be allowed to constantly dominate the discourse around reform? Let's get to the heart of the real issue here — psychiatry and its wish to retain its legal powers. Psychiatrists use a legal defence of medical necessity for forced treatment but this is increasingly untenable.
As Dr Pat Bracken, the highly respected independent consultant psychiatrist, has written: If psychiatry is going to take away people's liberty and use invasive methods of treatment, then it needs to be 'confident that we can predict outcomes, and happy that we understand how our treatments work and for whom.' His conclusion – and the now widely accepted scientific reality, is that psychiatry cannot reach this efficacy standard.
The treatment on offer for people who are severely unwell and distressed is not, as some may erroneously believe, intensive therapy that seeks to get to the root cause of the issue. Rather it is drugs and sometimes electricity. There may be psychological interventions but these are few and far between.
Of course there are situations where people need acute care and medication to stabilise them, but traumatising environments that use powerful psychotropic drugs should not be the only answer when someone is in distress. People in this system are guinea pigs, labelled treatment resistant if drugs don't work, lacking insight and branded non-compliant if they don't agree with doctors and do what they are told.
Debate in Ireland is regressing as is our move towards a rights-based system. Just this week it has been reported that the Cabinet has signed off on an amendment brought to Cabinet that someone who is involuntarily admitted to an acute psychiatric unit can be detained for up to 42 days, an increase on the 21 days previously proposed under the bill. This is a flagrant move in the wrong direction with no debate and no rationale given.
In this paper recently Dr Suzanne Crowe argued that people experiencing psychosis do not know they are ill and have no insight into their psychiatric condition. This contention assumes that viewing people through a psychiatric lens is the legitimate view, ergo if a person does not subscribe to this view 'psychiatric illness', then this means they have no insight and therefore must have their liberty taken away to be sufficiently chemically restrained.
People who are struggling, who are different, who are living in a chaotic family or community, who have extraordinary experiences, who are in deep emotional distress may not have 'insight' into the limitations of psychiatric diagnosis but the way to help them and those around them is not to lock them up as second-class citizens, take away their liberty and assault their personhood.
Insight is so very important, but it is a two-way concept. In order for these 'psychotic people' to receive the help and human engagement they may need for healing, it is important that those tasked with providing care also develop insight. Insight into the multiple perspectives, experiences and circumstances that cause people to warrant support; insight into the need to provide choices that might be more conducive to people wanting to engage, and insight into the damage the 'medical model' paradigm of care causes.
This is about a fundamental right to health. Moving towards a rights-based legal system, as outlined in the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, to which Ireland is a signatory, means treating people as rights holders, not as mere subjects of legal or state control.
Consent
Unquestionably, evidence-based care should be at the core of cancer or heart, or any other type of health treatment. Therefore, it cannot be the purview of just one highly contested profession (psychiatry) to impose what is increasingly seen as a dogmatic ideology onto people who are already in a vulnerable state.
This is not to say psychiatry should not be part of a suite of measures available to people, but mental health care should be based around consent and choice — a right to choice should be enshrined in legislation, and requisite funding must be put into things like family work, peer support, peer-run grassroots organisations, community development, non-medical crisis houses and open dialogue.
Choices should not be viewed through the sole lens of a psychiatric classification system that prescribes meaning to people's struggles, distress, environmental outcomes and extraordinary experiences. These choices have long been mandated as part of the post-psychiatry paradigm for mental health service provision, and the new paradigm is awash with international examples of best practice.
In other words, there are examples of how we can do things better. Certainly, things cannot get much worse for people in distress.
In 2013, the UN Special Rapporteur on Torture explicitly stated that forced psychiatric treatment may amount to torture or ill-treatment, especially when not evidence-based. Doctors may be offended that their well-intentioned treatment is causing harm, but advocates cannot dampen the quest for change and justice to appease psychiatrists.
Because the harsh truth is that while some coercive practices might not always meet the legal threshold for torture, they do often qualify as inhuman or degrading treatment. Surely if there is even a question that 'care' could be considered as something akin to torture, this requires radical debate and reform.
Jennifer Hough is a human rights and social justice advocate
Dr Líam Mac Gabhann is Associate Professor in Mental Health Practice at Dublin City University
Read More
Watchdog to create code of practice for using surveillance in mental health services
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Independent
24-06-2025
- Irish Independent
Cabinet to approve name of €2.4bn National Children's Hospital Ireland
The plain title for the hospital is due before Cabinet today. The hope is that construction will be finished in late September and it could be opened around this time next year. There has been debate around who it should be named after with suggestions around doctors and nurses in the past who have made a contribution to medicine here. The naming of the hospital is a milestone and will bring the prospect of a final finish to its construction a step nearer. In April, Sinn Féin spokesperson for Gaeilge, Gaeltacht and Arts, Deputy Aengus Ó Snodaigh, submitted a Bill for introduction to the Dáil which would name the new national children's hospital after Dr Kathleen Lynn, one of Ireland's foremost pioneering medics who founded Ireland's first hospital for infants, and the only woman commandant of the 1916 Rising. The Bill was co-sponsored by Ó Snodaigh's constituency colleague Máire Devine TD, Rose Conway-Walsh TD who is Sinn Féin's TD for Dr Lynn's home county of Mayo, and party health spokesperson, David Cullinane TD. Teachta Ó Snodaigh said: 'As people across Ireland use the opportunity of Easter to remember the sacrifice and heroism of Irish republicans before, during and after the 1916 Rising, this Bill offers a concrete way of honouring the memory of one of the most inspirational and too-often ignored of those heroes. 'The Killala-born Church of Ireland woman forged a trailblazing career in male-dominated medicine, as GP in Rathmines from 1904 and the first female resident of Dublin's Victoria Eye and Ear Hospital. The suffragette also helped out at soup kitchens during the 1913 Lock-Out, taught first-aid to Cumann na mBan and was Chief Medical Officer of the Irish Citizen Army, becoming the most senior ranking woman in the 1916 Rising when she took over command of the republicans at City Hall,' said Mr Ó Snodaigh. 'In the period after the Rising, she was arrested, spent time in prisons in Ireland and England, went on the run, was captured, and was let out of prison because her medical skills were in such need during the Spanish Flu epidemic. Dr. Lynn was Vice President of Sinn Féin in 1917, served as an elected councillor in Rathmines for ten years, and was elected as an anti-Treaty Sinn Féin TD in 1923. 'With all that going on, it is truly incredible that Dr Lynn along with Madeleine ffrench-Mullen and others established Teach Naomh Ultáin (St Ultan's Hospital) as the first hospital for infants in Ireland, and the only hospital entirely managed by women, in 1919. This hospital played a pivotal role eradicating TB in Ireland by introducing the BCG vaccine. The hospital also pioneered Montessori child education. 'There is widespread support for naming the hospital in Dr Lynn's honour, including an Uplift petition of almost 6,000 people, the backing of trade unions SIPTU and Fórsa, as well as historians Diarmaid Ferriter, Dr Mary McAuliffe, Dr Martin Mansergh, ophthalmologist Dr Tim Horgan, and Prof Mary Horgan, the first woman President of the Royal College of Physicians of Ireland. 'Both An Taoiseach, Micheál Martin TD, and the Minister for Health, Jennifer Carroll MacNeill TD, have responded positively to the proposal previously, saying respectively that Dr Lynn was 'a very worthy choice' and that there was 'nothing not to like' about her,' he said.
Irish Daily Mirror
23-06-2025
- Irish Daily Mirror
Taoiseach Micheál Martin vows to come down even harder on sale of vapes
Taoiseach Micheál Martin has vowed that further legislation cracking down on vapes will be introduced to target flavoured and disposable products. He made the comments at the World Conference on Tobacco Control, which is taking place this week at the Dublin Convention Centre. Under plans devised by former health minister Stephen Donnelly, a new licensing system for the retail sale of tobacco products and nicotine-inhaling products such as e-cigarettes will be introduced in February 2026. This will enable retail outlets to obtain annual licences to sell these products. Despite Cabinet approving plans in September 2024 to ban disposable vapes and flavours, the Irish Mirror understands there is still no date for the implementation of the plans. A ban on disposable vapes came into effect in Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK on June 1. The Taoiseach vowed on Monday that the legislation will be introduced and there will be a further crackdown on the products. Mr Martin said: 'I'm a very strong opponent of vapes and I have been from the beginning. 'There was very little due diligence done in terms of the composition of vapes and in terms of their impact on health. 'It's quite extraordinary that products of that kind got on the market and onto the shelves without any real health and safety analysis. That has always been my position. 'Any measures that reduce or eliminate vapes from the perspective of public health is a good thing. 'Ireland has made significant moves on that front. We will have significant restrictions coming in next February as a result of the legislation passed by the last Government. 'There is further legislation being planned in terms of the sale of disposable, the use of flavours, and I would see this as a continuation of measures that were adopted last year." He added: 'Certainly, I would favour the strongest possible measures against vaping. I spoke to [Former Chief Medical Adviser to the US President] Dr [Anthony] Fauci when he was in Dublin last year, and I spoke to a lot of public health experts. 'A lot of research has been undertaken now highlighting the dangers posed by vapes to the lungs of people and potential health conditions that can arise after use.'
Irish Examiner
17-06-2025
- Irish Examiner
Dr Suzanne Crowe: FemTech can fight medical misogyny — but not if it's going to be used to monitor us
A couple of months ago I was contacted through LinkedIn seeking support for a start-up company keen to target women seeking health services using a digital platform. Specifically, mental health services. As a mother of two young women, my interest was piqued by the term the company used in the description of their innovative product: FemTech. FemTech is the term for the pairing of technology with women's health and wellbeing. It was coined in 2016 by Ida Tin, a Danish entrepreneur who co-founded a menstrual tracking app called Clue. In almost a decade, there has been an explosion of devices, services and software applications aimed at longstanding deficits in women's healthcare. Novel technology solutions include contraceptive prescription and delivery, fertility-tracking and advice, health support for new mothers and their newborn babies, at-home testing for sexually transmitted infections, smart lactation pads, osteoporosis predictors, and psychology assessments. As one friend put it to me, "men get trading platforms for shares and fitness trackers, women get sold stuff to 'fix' their bodies". FemTech is now a massive industry, with Flo, the period-tracking app valued at almost a billion dollars. Dr Suzanne Crowe: 'It's hard not to see the rapid growth of FemTech as a comment on women's healthcare as it is currently provided.' Picture: Moya Nolan Both my daughters have used menstrual apps since they were young teenagers, enjoying the accessibility and responsiveness. It's a world away from the coy TV ads I grew up with, depicting strange blue fluid being poured onto pads. Historically, medical research focused almost uniquely on white men, and women's health concerns were often overlooked or dismissed. Dr Hazel Wallace's book The Female Factor captures the extent of medical misogyny and women's exclusion from diagnosis and treatment. Restriction extended to the development of medications, where women were excluded from testing for many years, leading to dose ranges based only on men's bodies. Coupled with a pervasive shame attached to sexual health, mental health and women's bodies, traditional medical practice has unwittingly created a significant gap which healthcare 'disruptors' are eager to capitalize on. This is largely a positive thing. But if technology solutions become the dominant offering, they may contribute to leaving ever-increasing service gaps unaddressed. Technology bypasses some issues but not all, fostering more empowered, but increasingly frustrated, women who continue to require intervention from an overwhelmed local hospital. It is a tool, not a replacement for a functioning health service. Technology won't do much to change attitudes among healthcare professionals to women's health needs either – that needs to come from deep listening, respect, kindness and education. The potential benefits are clear: technology empowers women to input their personal information, identify symptom patterns, and possible health issues, and use that data to receive personalised healthcare. Using software, they can consider a diagnosis, learn what their choices are, and make informed decisions. Digital platforms carry no judgment, with women from different ethnic origins and/or the LGBT+ community finding understanding there. Of course, empathic patient-focused care, delivered in partnership is fundamental to healthcare. So, it's hard not to see the rapid growth of FemTech as a comment on women's healthcare as it is currently provided. As FemTech moves to fill a perceived gap, it would be easier to leave traditional views undisturbed rather than reflecting on how our people-based service can improve. Just as vinyl records gave way to CDs, and CDs ceded to music streaming, traditional health services must apply humility, excise stigma and barriers, and improve their offerings or be left behind. Data tracking Not only do we risk losing our imperfect humanity in a technology-dominated health service, but we also risk the negative consequences of commercialising health data. Putting a price on data and its interpretation may make this assistive technology too expensive for the marginalised groups it was aspiring to reach. More worryingly, a research group in Cambridge University's Minderoo Centre for Technology and Democracy have raised significant concerns about the use of data collected by fertility tracking apps. Data collected on apps is designated 'special category' rather than treated as medical data from a regulation perspective. It potentially could provide a valuable advertising tool for companies – or worse. The report's authors caution that information from cycle tracking apps in the wrong hands could result in risks to job prospects, workplace monitoring, health insurance discrimination, and in some countries, limit access to termination of pregnancy. In an ideal world, new digital solutions would become publicly owned, allowing integration into real-life health services, leading to better outcomes for society. However, tech entrepreneurs are not going to wait for Valhalla. As women's healthcare needs are finally validated, it is vital that new technologies are evaluated for potential benefits, and or potential harms. Any likely harms, for example compromise of privacy, require informed consent and regulation, especially when it comes to the retention and use of highly personal data. FemTech is here to stay. We must ensure the hand guiding its use is an ethical one. Dr Suzanne Crowe, consultant in paediatric intensive care, President of the Medical Council Read More A period of life we need to talk about — the stigma that still surrounds menstruation
