Challenge to detention in psychiatric hospital rejected

The High Court has ruled that the detention of a man in the psychiatric unit of Waterford Regional Hospital is lawful

The High Court has ruled that the detention of a man in the psychiatric unit of Waterford Regional Hospital is lawful. A psychiatrist had earlier told the court the man suffers from a disorder characterised by persecution complexes and delusions of infidelity.

Mr David Harty (27) of Shandon Road, Dungarvan, had claimed his wife, Geraldine, had him committed to the psychiatric unit of Waterford Regional Hospital. He alleged he was concerned about his wife's motive, believed she had been unfaithful and claimed he was being detained against his will.

Yesterday, Mr Robert O'Neill, for Mr Harty, said his client was examined initially in a Garda station by a GP but was not told of his rights. He was brought to the hospital, no order was made for his detention but he was held overnight as a public patient.

The strict procedures laid down in the the mental treatment legislation had not been followed and his client had been unlawfully detained.

READ MORE

Dr Derek O'Sullivan, a consultant psychiatrist with the hospital, said in an affidavit that Mr Harty had a disorder characterised by persecutory delusions and delusions of infidelity. He had no insight into the nature of his illness and the need for treatment. His condition should settle with medication and he would be discharged when he was stable.

There had been a past history of violence, substance abuse, failure to comply with medication and outpatient follow-up.

Mr Harty was brought to the hospital with the assistance of gardaí using forms which related to long- term patient detention. This documentation and other documents relating to a temporary patient were completed by his GP and his wife on March 15th last.

Dr O'Sullivan said it appeared to him that Mr Harty should be detained on a temporary basis rather than be admitted as a permanent patient.

Mr Justice Ó Caoimh found Mr Harty was lawfully detained under the certification completed by Dr O'Sullivan.

However, he said, his decision in no way justified the initial action taken and the detention of Mr Harty overnight in circumstances where the procedures in the Act were not followed.

He was concerned that a member of the medical profession completed two forms which gave contrary certifications in this case.

He believed that Dr O'Sullivan,, appreciating the reality of the situation, took action which had rendered Mr Harty's detention valid .