Ask The Masked AMHP for the answers to your thorny MHA related problems. He might know the answer. Or not.
The Masked AMHP always tries to assist people, whether professionals or patients, who ask for assistance or advice. However, I cannot guarantee that my advice is definitive.
My postbag continues to contain frequent requests for advice from parents of mentally disordered people who are encountering problems in receiving appropriate aftercare, and are then being charged for it despite being subject to Sec.117 aftercare. They often find themselves caught in funding arguments between the local authority and the Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG).
Here are a couple of cases which also involve issues concerning Autistic Spectrum Disorders and mental illness.
A parent writes:
My daughter has learning disabilities and was admitted to an assessment and treatment unit under Sec. 2, followed by a Sec.3. She was discharged onto a CTO after a long drawn out battle trying to get the CCG and the local authority to agree who was going to pay for her continuing care.
She lived in residential accommodation before the section but it was not appropriate for her to return due to the severity of her needs. She had been diagnosed with Bi-polar disorder, and subsequently whilst in hospital on the Sec.3 she was assessed as being on the Autistic Spectrum and it was agreed she would be best supported by a provider with specialist knowledge around Autism.
She has been settled in her placement, but after a financial assessment by the local authority she has to pay nearly £90 per week towards her care costs. She has Sec.117 aftercare funding and the CCG pay 50% of her fees and the local authority pay 50% of her fees (then bill her for the £90 per week) After a recent DoLS application the BIA has questioned why she is paying for her care at all when she has Sec.117 funding. They are adamant my daughter should not be paying at all. My daughter had to be housed out of area as there was no provision to meet her needs in her home area. They have not argued this.
Can you help?
The Masked AMHP replies:
There can be no doubt. As she is subject to Sec.117 aftercare she should not be paying anything towards her identified mental health needs. She should be entitled to a full rebate of what she has been charged already.
Would it make a difference that the CCG argued that her learning disability is not related to her mental health issues? So they should only pay for half?
The Masked AMHP:
A learning disability is a mental disorder within the meaning of the Mental Health Act. Therefore needs arising from the learning disability are covered under Sec.117. They're really trying it on!
Another parent writes:
My son is 30 and lives in supported accommodation that is funded by the local authority where he was living when he was sectioned under the 1983 MHA (many times, mostly under Section 3). He was in and out of hospital for several years before being discharged 3 years ago.
Since he left home to go to college when he was just 19 his mental health was very poor and he was admitted to hospital with psychosis on numerous occasions. He was put on anti-psychotic medication and eventually, when discharged from hospital, he was on a CTO. The medication made things worse for him. The CTO is now lifted and he is now off medication.
For many years we thought our son was autistic (Asperger's) and that this was at the heart of his distress. Eventually he was diagnosed with Autism Level 1. This diagnosis has really helped him turn his life round but we have had to pay for the psychological and day-to-day specialist support for him as the supported accommodation that he has been living in for the last 3 years is for people with mental health problems only and is very inadequate.
We have now found excellent supported housing that is Asperger's specific that will support our son to gain the life skills he lacks. It will only cost a little bit more than his current care package (24 hours a week) but the CMHT and LA social worker are saying that the Housing Panel is not likely to support the move as the recent Placement Review recommended our son be stepped down to 'independent living'. We have said we can afford the top-up on the fee difference.
The social worker is now implying that our son no longer has a mental health condition, that he is autistic and therefore should be assessed by the Adult Social Care team and won't be eligible for funding for supported housing. Our son is very bright and articulate but this masks so much of his vulnerability and fragility. The social worker is now intimating that he is no longer entitled to Section 117 aftercare funding. This would mean he would be expected to live alone without support (unless we pay for it) and all that might mean for his safety and fragile mental health.
We see a continuum from our son's autism to his previous poor mental health - the social worker just sees CMHT/LA dividing lines and overstretched budgets. How can we protect our son's Section 117 funding at least until he is receives the right support to enable him to live independently successfully?
The Masked AMHP replies:
It's difficult to give a definitive reply to your question. You say your son has experienced periods of psychosis in the past, but that he is no longer prescribed any medication. However, if he is still seeing a psychiatrist and/or has a care coordinator in a mental health team, then he is still receiving aftercare, and therefore would continue to be entitled to Sec.117 aftercare.
He could only be discharged from Sec.117 aftercare if he was no longer receiving any services for mental disorder, and was no longer considered to be suffering from a mental disorder within the meaning of the Mental Health Act. However, the definition of mental disorder is broad, and would include autism or autistic spectrum disorder.
A difficulty would be the difference between what you would like for your son, and what the local authority and mental health services consider he requires to meet his mental health needs.
If your son is still under a mental health team, it might be worth getting a NHS psychiatrist to review his diagnosis. If he has been discharged from the mental health team, then his GP could refer him for a NHS diagnostic assessment.
But in any case, autism is still a mental disorder.
Thank you for your very detailed response. It is helpful to understand that autism (albeit Aspergers) is considered to be a mental disorder (eating problems, anxiety and OCD are part of my son's life too). My son hasn't yet been discharged from the mental health team but the pressures on the LA social care budget are such that he would be an easy one to pick off and no longer fund. You are right it seems that there is now a difference of opinion about what we feel our son needs and what the CMHT and LA feel - painful.