Consumers' experiences of rights-based mental health laws: Lessons from Victoria, Australia.

Many countries embarked on reforms of mental health law in the wake of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. These reforms have had varying levels of success. This paper considers the experience of consumers in the Victorian mental health system, drawing on an evaluation that asked consumers and clinicians about their knowledge and experience of rights under the Victorian Mental Health Act, 2014. The data show that consumers were not informed of their rights, were not involved in decisions about treatment, were not able to access safeguards, and could not exercise their rights. The explanations for this include limited staff time, unclear delegations of responsibility, a lack of knowledge, training, and support for rights, and a preference for 'best interests' approaches. The paper identifies tangible reforms that would maintain rights for consumers, including competent refusal of treatment, legislative and regulatory reforms, and training and resourcing. Consumers in this study found that the rights-based framework in the Mental Health Act, 2014 had such an insignificant effect on clinical mental health practice in Victoria that their rights appeared to be illusory.

The need for independent advocacy for people subject to mental health community treatment orders.

Independent mental health advocacy (IMHA) has been proposed as a way of maintaining peoples' rights in involuntary settings, but little is known about the challenges and opportunities associated with the provision of independent mental health advocacy to those on compulsory treatment orders in the community. In Victoria, Australia, an IMHA service is available to people who are at risk of or subject to compulsory treatment, including those who are subject to Community Treatment Orders. The IMHA service is based on the independent advocacy model developed in the United Kingdom. This paper details the benefits and challenges of providing independent non-legal advocacy to those in the community, drawing on a 15-month independent co-produced evaluation of the IMHA service. With limited publicly available sector level data, the evaluation employed qualitative approaches. Issues raised include the need to better target limited resources in the most effective way and the problem of ensuring timely and adequate access. While advocacy was well received by consumers, tensions specific to the community setting were influenced by the attitudes of clinicians to need, risk and recovery as opposed to a coherent understanding of consumer preference and choice.