Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think sectioning shouldn’t be done lightly

252 replies

User5022 · 09/10/2019 05:55

Eg used because an adult decided they didn’t want to rest of a treatment. I always assumed it had a really high threshold.

OP posts:
bakesalesally · 09/10/2019 05:56

Can it be easily done? I don't know anything about it

NutRoastNancy · 09/10/2019 05:59

It isn’t done lightly in my experience.

SonEtLumiere · 09/10/2019 06:02

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

DianaT1969 · 09/10/2019 06:02

I don't know much about it. Had assumed it was rarely used. This treatment that you mention, what would that be?
Do you think it should be used if the person is a danger to themselves? A danger to others?

Ponoka7 · 09/10/2019 06:02

Under the MH Act, one of the criteria for not sectioning someone is if the treatment is available in the community.

So if someone refusrs to comply with necessary treatment (to keep them or wider society safe) then that is grounds for a section to be imposed.

That is a high threshold.

lumpy76 · 09/10/2019 06:04

It isn't. My late dsis was sectioned 11 times - she should have been section more times but often she would be able to appear lucid enough for an inexperienced doctor/SW not to agree to the section. In addition she should have been kept on a section (there are different types) but would be unsectioned having been on a 28 day one only to be allowed to become very unwell again and the process have to be done all over again.

Countryescape · 09/10/2019 06:08

It definitely isn’t done lightly. Did the adult stoping treatment endanger themselves or others? That’s grounds to section

lumpy76 · 09/10/2019 06:09

For a section to go ahead the patient has to be very mentally unwell - a definite danger to themselves or others & all other methods of trying to get the patient to comply with treatment needs to have been tried. Then a social worker and 2 doctors - GP and duty Psych have to agree that the person needs sectioning.

HalyardHitch · 09/10/2019 06:10

My brother's currently sectioned. He's a danger to himself and others. I can't imagine what other reasons there would be but maybe I'm naive. He doesn't have the option

Original poster
User5022 · 09/10/2019 06:13

The rest of the nac treatment only four hours not completed.

OP posts:
doxxed · 09/10/2019 06:16

This reply has been withdrawn

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ for privacy reasons.

Original poster
User5022 · 09/10/2019 06:17

Yes it was

OP posts:
Fairylea · 09/10/2019 06:26

It’s not done lightly. There are a huge shortage of in patient beds for mental health reasons. They will only section people if absolutely necessary.

RolytheRhino · 09/10/2019 06:26

No, I think if your mental health is preventing you taking necessary treatment to improve your mental health then an outside agency needs to ensure that you do it. If you have to be sectioned for that to happen then it's got to happen, surely? Otherwise you're letting an illness decide whether it should be treated.

RiddleyW · 09/10/2019 06:29

We had a neighbour who was sectioned often - threshold seemed very high for him. Wandering the street in bare feet in the snow shouting wasn’t enough.

TheMustressMhor · 09/10/2019 06:34

Is it a relative who has refused the NAC?

Or yourself?

There are a range of Sections covered by the MHA.

Original poster
User5022 · 09/10/2019 06:36

Relative they have put them straight on a two and informed them they will be going to the unit.

OP posts:
Mac47 · 09/10/2019 06:37

It is a very high threshold. Do not be so glib about something which is actually an enormous issue - refusal to take meds or treatment can have terrible consequences. Capacity is at an absolute premium and such decisions would not be taken lightly.

TheMustressMhor · 09/10/2019 06:37

Has the relative had a long history of mental illness/OD?

TheMustressMhor · 09/10/2019 06:38

You must bear in mind that failing to complete NAC after a paracetamol OD can mean that the patient goes into liver failure and dies.

CheeryB · 09/10/2019 06:39

My brother was sectioned on several occasions. Not one of these decisions was taken lightly. And he was complying with treatment. It just wasn't working. He was in a real state - soiling his bed, not eating for days, hygiene was a distant memory. On one occasion I had to beg them for weeks to help him. No, they don't do it lightly. Perhaps there are circumstances of which you are unaware.

Stompythedinosaur · 09/10/2019 06:39

My experience is that the threshold is high for a section 2 or 3, somewhat less high for a 135/136/5.2/5.4.

Declining lifesaving treatment is quite a serious thing.

LadyAllegraImelda · 09/10/2019 06:40

If the person will try to kill themselves again then of course they have met the threshold. Is this for you OP?

Teachermaths · 09/10/2019 06:40

It isn't done lightly. In a lot of cases it's done too late.

TheMustressMhor · 09/10/2019 06:41

The staff also have to consider how many grams of paracetamol were taken/how long before NAC was started/has the patient already got some liver disease/will they do it again if discharged/how much paracetamol in the blood can be measured.

All these variables have to be weighed up.

Swipe left for the next trending thread