YOU ARE IN AN ABSOLUTE "LEGAL MINE-FIELD." PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT IF YOU DON'T MAKE A COMPLETE BREAK FROM THE "MENTAL UNHEALTH SYSTEM", YOU WILL BECOME AN ABSOLUTE PRISONER AND WILL BE FORCED TO UNDERGO MASSIVE DOSES OF HARMFUL DRUGS AND WHEN THAT FAILS, YOU WILL THEN BE "FORCED" TO ENDURE "ECT". (LEGALLY YOU WILL HAVE NO RECOURSE WHATSOEVER. SO PLEASE, GET OUT OF PSYCHIATRIC / MENTAL WARD AS SOON AS POSSIBLE, YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT).
 |
TRY FIND A LAWYER THAT WILL SUPPORT YOU.
I KNOW YOU ARE DEFINITELY ENTITLED TO A FREE LEGAL AID LAWYER. EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE PART OF THE "ECT" SYSTEM. |
IF YOU ARE "TRAPPED" RIGHT NOW: HERE IS WHAT YOU MUST DO IMMEDIATELY !!!
LAWYERS WILL BE RESTRICTED AS TO HOW MUCH THEY ARE WILLING TO USE THE LEGAL LANGUAGE BELOW. SO ITS BEST IF YOU CAN QUICKLY EDUCATE YOURSELF SO YOU CAN DECIDE WHICH WAY IS BEST FOR YOU.
FIRSTLY; FIND ALL THE SUPPORT YOU CAN GET FROM FAMILY, FRIENDS AND YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.
PLEASE DISASSOCIATE WITH ANYONE THAT DOESN'T WANT TO SUPPORT YOU.
IMMEDIATELY SEND A LETTER TO ALL THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, DEMANDING THAT YOU BE HEARD
AND RELEASED STRAIGHT AWAY AS YOU ARE NOT "CONSENTING" TO THIS INJUSTICE.
Please DOWNLOAD the Notice of Demand EXAMPLE DOCUMENT below that you can use
and put in your own personal details with a combination of information below.
LAWYERS WILL BE RESTRICTED AS TO HOW MUCH THEY ARE WILLING TO USE THE LEGAL LANGUAGE BELOW. SO ITS BEST IF YOU CAN QUICKLY EDUCATE YOURSELF SO YOU CAN DECIDE WHICH WAY IS BEST FOR YOU.
FIRSTLY; FIND ALL THE SUPPORT YOU CAN GET FROM FAMILY, FRIENDS AND YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.
PLEASE DISASSOCIATE WITH ANYONE THAT DOESN'T WANT TO SUPPORT YOU.
IMMEDIATELY SEND A LETTER TO ALL THE FOLLOWING PEOPLE, DEMANDING THAT YOU BE HEARD
AND RELEASED STRAIGHT AWAY AS YOU ARE NOT "CONSENTING" TO THIS INJUSTICE.
Please DOWNLOAD the Notice of Demand EXAMPLE DOCUMENT below that you can use
and put in your own personal details with a combination of information below.
| notice_of_demand_letter_for_ect_victims_2011.doc |
|
Elizabeth Windsor (Queen Elizabeth II of England
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth, Buckingham Palace London SW1A 1AA, United Kingdom Julian Gillard, acting as The Honourable Julian Gillard, Prime Minister of Australia Parliament House Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2600 Tony Negus acting as Mr Tony Negus APM Australian Federal Police Commissioner AOCC Client Liaison Team General Post Office Box 401 Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2600 |
Quentin Bryce, acting as
The Honourable Quentin Bryce Australian Governor General of the Commonwealth of Australia Government House, Dunrossil Drive Yarralumla, Australian Capital Territory Tony Abbott acing as the Honourable Tony Abbott MHR Leader of the Opposition Federal Member for Warringah, Parliament House RG 109 Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2600 Chief Justice of the High Court of Australia Chief Justice French AC, Justice Gummow AC, Justice Hayne AC, Justice Heydon AC, Justice Crennan AC, Justice Crennan AC, Justice Bell Parkes Place, PARKES, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, 2600 |
YOUR STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, YOUR STATE PREMIER, YOUR STATE MINISTER FOR POLICE,
YOUR LOCAL MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT AND AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL.
YOU HAVE TO GO TO YOUR LOCAL PRESS AND LOCAL NEWSPAPERS
and START PETITIONING IN YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.
HEADLINE - INTERNATIONAL APPEAL FOR HELP
RE: Urgent and Life Threatening Unlawful Imprisonment of "VICTIM"
To all parties addressed by this Urgent and Desperate Appeal for Help.
YOUR LOCAL MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT AND AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL.
YOU HAVE TO GO TO YOUR LOCAL PRESS AND LOCAL NEWSPAPERS
and START PETITIONING IN YOUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.
HEADLINE - INTERNATIONAL APPEAL FOR HELP
RE: Urgent and Life Threatening Unlawful Imprisonment of "VICTIM"
To all parties addressed by this Urgent and Desperate Appeal for Help.
It is with Deep Concern that I write to you in relation to various breaches of Commonwealth Laws, abuses of process, abuses of natural law and rights against "VICTIM", who's said rights are guaranteed under the Magna Carta 1215, Petition of Rights 1628, Bill of Rights 1689, Articles of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as well as Division 268, 270 and 271 of the Criminal Code Act 1995 Commonwealth of Australia, have been abused and denied my rights from "name parties involved".
Habeas corpus (Latin: "you may have the body")[1] is a writ, or legal action, through which a prisoner can be released from unlawful detention. The remedy can be sought by the prisoner or by another person coming to his aid. Habeas corpus originated in the English legal system, but it is now available in many nations. It has historically been an important legal instrument safeguarding individual freedom against arbitrary state action.
A writ of habeas corpus is a summons with the force of a court order, addressed to the custodian (a prison official for example) demanding that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine if the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person. If the custodian does not have authority to detain the prisoner, then he must be released from custody. The prisoner, or another person acting on his or her behalf, may petition the court, or a judge, for a writ of habeas corpus. One reason for the writ to be sought by a person other than the prisoner is that the detainee might be held incommunicado. Most civil law jurisdictions provide a similar remedy for those unlawfully detained, but this is not always called "habeas corpus".[2] For example, in some Spanish-speaking nations, the equivalent remedy for unlawful imprisonment is the amparo de libertad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
A writ of habeas corpus is a summons with the force of a court order, addressed to the custodian (a prison official for example) demanding that a prisoner be taken before the court, and that the custodian present proof of authority, allowing the court to determine if the custodian has lawful authority to detain the person. If the custodian does not have authority to detain the prisoner, then he must be released from custody. The prisoner, or another person acting on his or her behalf, may petition the court, or a judge, for a writ of habeas corpus. One reason for the writ to be sought by a person other than the prisoner is that the detainee might be held incommunicado. Most civil law jurisdictions provide a similar remedy for those unlawfully detained, but this is not always called "habeas corpus".[2] For example, in some Spanish-speaking nations, the equivalent remedy for unlawful imprisonment is the amparo de libertad. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_corpus
PLEASE WRITE AN AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF A "WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS".
STATE THE FOLLOWING 4 COMPLAINTS THAT YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO:
1. MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT HARMED ANOTHER LIVING SOUL.
2. MR/MRS IS NOT A DANGER TO THEMSELF
3. ESTABLISH THAT MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT CONSENTED TO VOLUNTARILY IMPRISONMENT AND INSTITUTIONALISION
4. ESTABLISH THAT MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT ENTERED INTO ANY CONTRACT THAT IMPRISONS THEM AGAINST THERE OWN CONSENT
WRITE IN THE BODY OF LETTER ALL YOUR GRIEVANCES AND PROOF OF INJUSTICES
The evidence before the Courts and People have been addressed in this Affidavit sustains that "MR/MRS"....
have been denied due process of the law and natural justice. Due process of the law compelled/s "MR/MRS"...... immediate release from imprisonment / institutionalisation.
I instruct all parties addressed by this APPEAL for HELP, as a matter of Justice, to contact the relevant people in Authority that can facilitate MR/MRS immediate release from imprisonment and permit due process to be seen
to being performed in (Name, Address and Location of abuse).
STATE THE FOLLOWING 4 COMPLAINTS THAT YOU ARE ABSOLUTELY OPPOSED TO:
1. MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT HARMED ANOTHER LIVING SOUL.
2. MR/MRS IS NOT A DANGER TO THEMSELF
3. ESTABLISH THAT MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT CONSENTED TO VOLUNTARILY IMPRISONMENT AND INSTITUTIONALISION
4. ESTABLISH THAT MR/MRS VICTIM HAS NOT ENTERED INTO ANY CONTRACT THAT IMPRISONS THEM AGAINST THERE OWN CONSENT
WRITE IN THE BODY OF LETTER ALL YOUR GRIEVANCES AND PROOF OF INJUSTICES
The evidence before the Courts and People have been addressed in this Affidavit sustains that "MR/MRS"....
have been denied due process of the law and natural justice. Due process of the law compelled/s "MR/MRS"...... immediate release from imprisonment / institutionalisation.
I instruct all parties addressed by this APPEAL for HELP, as a matter of Justice, to contact the relevant people in Authority that can facilitate MR/MRS immediate release from imprisonment and permit due process to be seen
to being performed in (Name, Address and Location of abuse).
LEGAL COMPLEXITIES - I have included the Current "Electro Convulsive Treatment Act" for NSW
http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/viewtop/inforce/act+8+2007+FIRST+0+N/
"Try stopping ECT from being administered and you will hit a brick wall".
There was a 3 page Legal Deposition that was submitted to the Mental Health Tribunal that I am not allowed to
divulge on this website. I have been "refrained" from using any names on this website; or I will be "prosecuted".
I have been told by many Legal Advisor's that the Australian Federal Laws will 'over-ride' State Laws in regards to speaking the truth and documenting the facts as I have done through this entire process, and it will be used as Evidence in Courts of Law as evidential proof and legally enforceable.
I have previously joined a class action lawsuit against Eli Lilly, for the most Dangerous Drug (ZYPREXA) ever released. Its a business model, a Drug Company has to make profits to survive. Over the last 15 years, they have grossed over $45 billion dollars in profits, and only had to pay out $3 billion dollars in lawsuits. So you do the maths.
40,000 people crippled by this DRUG, but that's OK; the Drug Company is happy they have made their fortune.
This same drug almost killed my mother and we were scolded by the Doctors for telling our mother that she needs
to stop taking this drug. It took a few months to finally get her back to normal.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/aussies-in-class-action-on-drug/story-e6frg6nf-1111113770012
I have been conversing with others about this "Mental Health Act" situation and I understand now that the psychiatrists enjoy a status provided by the NSW Mental Health Act 2007 and by the Media which is not reflected in the General Community. In fact the General Community is quite afraid and denegrades psychiatry as a whole.
The most often quoted saying is: "just tell them what they want you to hear".
My considered opinion is that the Mental Health Act is used as "Detention without Trial". I have also researched instances where the Mental Health Act is even used where a problem for the police has arisen which would not stand up in court and so the 'problem' is dealt with by (mis) applying the Mental Health Act.
I WILL BE WRITING MORE ABOUT THIS SHORTLY
Mental Health Act 2007 No 8 Current version for 9 July 2010 to date (accessed 22 October 2010 at 19:50) Chapter 4Part 2Division 3 Division 3Electro convulsive therapy
87 Definitions
In this Division:ECT administration inquiry—see section 96 (2).
ECT consent inquiry—see section 96 (1).
ECT determination—see section 96 (3).
ECT inquiry means an ECT administration inquiry or an ECT consent inquiry.
88 Offences relating to administration of electro convulsive treatment
(cf 1990 Act, ss 180–182)
(1) A person who is not a medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to another person.(2) A medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to a person:(a) otherwise than in accordance with this Division, or (b) at a place other than a mental health facility or other place approved by the Director-General. (3) A medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to a person unless there are present during the administration of the electro convulsive therapy not less than 2 medical practitioners (of whom the medical practitioner administering the electro convulsive therapy may be one):(a) one of whom is experienced in the administration of electro convulsive therapy, and (b) another of whom is experienced in the administration of anaesthesia. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units.
89 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered
Electro convulsive therapy may be administered only in the following circumstances:(a) to a person other than an involuntary patient, if the person meets the requirements for informed consent to the treatment and medical certification set out in this Division, (b) to an involuntary patient, after an ECT determination by the Tribunal at an ECT inquiry.Note. In this Part, involuntary patient includes a forensic patient, correctional patient and a person detained in a mental health facility (see section 82).
90 Refusal of treatment by medical superintendent
The medical superintendent of a mental health facility may refuse to allow electro convulsive therapy to be administered to a patient or person detained in the facility, even though the Tribunal has made a determination under this Division that enables the treatment to be given.
91 Informed consent requirements
(cf 1990 Act, s 183)
(1) A person is taken to have given informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy if the person gives a free, voluntary and written consent after this section is complied with.(2) The following steps must be taken before consent is obtained:(a) a fair explanation must be made to the person of the techniques or procedures to be followed, including an identification and explanation of any technique or procedure about which there is not sufficient data to recommend it as recognised treatment or to reliably predict the outcome of its performance, (b) a full description must be given, without exaggeration or concealment, to the person of any possible discomforts and risks of the treatment (including possible loss of memory), (c) a full description must be given to the person of any expected benefits of the treatment
(d) a full disclosure must be made, without exaggeration or concealment, to the person of any appropriate alternative treatments that would be advantageous to the person, (e) an offer must be made to the person to answer any inquiries concerning the procedures or any part of them, (f) the person must be given notice that the person is free to refuse or to withdraw consent and to discontinue the procedures or any part of them at any time, (g) a full disclosure must be made to the person of any financial relationship between the person proposing the administration of the treatment or the administering medical practitioner, or both, and the facility in which it is proposed to administer the treatment, (h) the person must be given notice of their right to obtain legal and medical advice and to be represented before giving consent
(i) any question relating to the techniques or procedures to be followed that is asked by the person must have been answered and the answers must appear to have been understood by the person, (j) a form setting out the steps in this subsection is to be given to the person and an oral explanation of the matters dealt with in the form is to be given to the person in a language with which the person is familiar. (3) The regulations are to prescribe forms setting out the steps to be taken before obtaining informed consent to electro convulsive therapy.
92 Person impaired by medication incapable of giving informed consent
(cf 1990 Act, s 184)
A person is presumed to be incapable of giving informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy if, when consent is sought, the person is affected by medication that impairs the person’s ability to give that consent.
93 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered to persons other than involuntary patients
(cf 1990 Act, s 185)
(1) Electro convulsive therapy may be administered to a person (other than an involuntary patient) if:(a) the person is capable of giving informed consent to the treatment and has given informed consent to the treatment, including a written consent in the form prescribed by the regulations, and (b) a certificate is given under this section by at least 2 medical practitioners, at least one of whom is a psychiatrist. (2) A certificate under this section is a certificate in writing that, after considering the clinical condition and history of treatment of, and any appropriate alternative treatments for, the person, the medical practitioners are of the opinion that electro convulsive therapy is:(a) a reasonable and proper treatment to be administered to the person, and (b) necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the person. (3) An authorised medical officer who is unsure whether a person is capable of giving informed consent may apply to the Tribunal for an ECT consent inquiry to determine whether the person is capable of giving informed consent and has given that consent.
94 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered to involuntary patients
(1) Electro convulsive therapy may be administered to an involuntary patient in accordance with an ECT determination made by the Tribunal at an ECT administration inquiry.(2) An authorised medical officer may apply to the Tribunal for an ECT administration inquiry about an involuntary patient if a certificate is given under this section by at least 2 medical practitioners, at least one of whom is a psychiatrist.(3) A certificate under this section is a certificate in writing that, after considering the clinical condition and history of treatment of, and any appropriate alternative treatments for, the patient, the medical practitioners are of the opinion that electro convulsive therapy is:(a) a reasonable and proper treatment to be administered to the patient, and (b) necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the patient.
95 Tribunal to hold inquiries promptly
The Tribunal must hold an ECT inquiry about a person as soon as practicable after an application is made to it under this Division.
96 Purpose and findings of ECT inquiries
(1) ECT consent inquiries about voluntary patients
The Tribunal is, on an ECT consent inquiry, to determine whether or not the person is capable of giving informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent.
(2) ECT administration inquiries about involuntary patients
The Tribunal is, on an ECT administration inquiry, to determine whether or not an ECT determination should be made in relation to the patient about whom the inquiry is held.
(3) ECT determinations that enable treatment of involuntary patients
An ECT determination is a determination:(a) that the patient is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent, or (b) that:(i) the patient is incapable of giving informed consent or is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy but has refused, or has neither consented nor refused, to have the treatment administered, and (ii) after considering the medical opinions and other information placed before it, the Tribunal is satisfied the electro convulsive therapy is a reasonable and proper treatment and is necessary and desirable for the safety or welfare of the patient.
(4) Maximum number of treatments for involuntary patients
In any ECT determination, the Tribunal must also specify the number of treatments that are approved (not exceeding 12).
(5) Increase in maximum number of treatments for involuntary patients
Despite subsection (4), the Tribunal may specify more than 12 treatments if the Tribunal is satisfied that, having regard to the special circumstances of the case (including the success of any previous electro convulsive therapy), the higher number of treatments is justified.
(6) Procedures applying to ECT inquiries
For the purposes of an ECT inquiry, the Tribunal is to do the following:(a) in the case of an ECT administration inquiry, find out from the patient about whom the inquiry is being held whether or not the patient was aware of the authorised medical officer’s obligation to give notice of the inquiry and whether notice of the inquiry was given in accordance with this Act, (b) inform the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held of the nature and possible results of the inquiry, if the patient or person has not or appears not to have been informed of them, (c) inquire about the administration of any medication to the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held and take account of its effect on the patient’s or person’s ability to communicate, (d) consider the views of the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held about the treatment, (e) consider any information before it.
(7) Duration of ECT determination
An ECT determination has effect for 6 months from the date the determination is made unless a shorter period is specified in the determination.
97 Electro convulsive therapy register
(1) A register containing information relating to the administration of electro convulsive therapy is to be kept in relation to each mental health facility or other place at which the treatment is administered.(2) The medical superintendent of the facility or the person approved by the Director-General for any other place is to keep the register or cause it to be kept.(3) The register is to be in the form prescribed by the regulations.(4) Particulars of a proposed administration of electro convulsive therapy are to be entered in the register before the therapy is administered, and any differences in the particulars of treatment actually administered are to be subsequently noted and explained in the register.(5) The register may be inspected at any time by the Tribunal, the Principal official visitor, an official visitor or the Director-General.
"Try stopping ECT from being administered and you will hit a brick wall".
There was a 3 page Legal Deposition that was submitted to the Mental Health Tribunal that I am not allowed to
divulge on this website. I have been "refrained" from using any names on this website; or I will be "prosecuted".
I have been told by many Legal Advisor's that the Australian Federal Laws will 'over-ride' State Laws in regards to speaking the truth and documenting the facts as I have done through this entire process, and it will be used as Evidence in Courts of Law as evidential proof and legally enforceable.
I have previously joined a class action lawsuit against Eli Lilly, for the most Dangerous Drug (ZYPREXA) ever released. Its a business model, a Drug Company has to make profits to survive. Over the last 15 years, they have grossed over $45 billion dollars in profits, and only had to pay out $3 billion dollars in lawsuits. So you do the maths.
40,000 people crippled by this DRUG, but that's OK; the Drug Company is happy they have made their fortune.
This same drug almost killed my mother and we were scolded by the Doctors for telling our mother that she needs
to stop taking this drug. It took a few months to finally get her back to normal.
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/aussies-in-class-action-on-drug/story-e6frg6nf-1111113770012
I have been conversing with others about this "Mental Health Act" situation and I understand now that the psychiatrists enjoy a status provided by the NSW Mental Health Act 2007 and by the Media which is not reflected in the General Community. In fact the General Community is quite afraid and denegrades psychiatry as a whole.
The most often quoted saying is: "just tell them what they want you to hear".
My considered opinion is that the Mental Health Act is used as "Detention without Trial". I have also researched instances where the Mental Health Act is even used where a problem for the police has arisen which would not stand up in court and so the 'problem' is dealt with by (mis) applying the Mental Health Act.
I WILL BE WRITING MORE ABOUT THIS SHORTLY
Mental Health Act 2007 No 8 Current version for 9 July 2010 to date (accessed 22 October 2010 at 19:50) Chapter 4Part 2Division 3 Division 3Electro convulsive therapy
87 Definitions
In this Division:ECT administration inquiry—see section 96 (2).
ECT consent inquiry—see section 96 (1).
ECT determination—see section 96 (3).
ECT inquiry means an ECT administration inquiry or an ECT consent inquiry.
88 Offences relating to administration of electro convulsive treatment
(cf 1990 Act, ss 180–182)
(1) A person who is not a medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to another person.(2) A medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to a person:(a) otherwise than in accordance with this Division, or (b) at a place other than a mental health facility or other place approved by the Director-General. (3) A medical practitioner must not administer electro convulsive therapy to a person unless there are present during the administration of the electro convulsive therapy not less than 2 medical practitioners (of whom the medical practitioner administering the electro convulsive therapy may be one):(a) one of whom is experienced in the administration of electro convulsive therapy, and (b) another of whom is experienced in the administration of anaesthesia. Maximum penalty: 50 penalty units.
89 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered
Electro convulsive therapy may be administered only in the following circumstances:(a) to a person other than an involuntary patient, if the person meets the requirements for informed consent to the treatment and medical certification set out in this Division, (b) to an involuntary patient, after an ECT determination by the Tribunal at an ECT inquiry.Note. In this Part, involuntary patient includes a forensic patient, correctional patient and a person detained in a mental health facility (see section 82).
90 Refusal of treatment by medical superintendent
The medical superintendent of a mental health facility may refuse to allow electro convulsive therapy to be administered to a patient or person detained in the facility, even though the Tribunal has made a determination under this Division that enables the treatment to be given.
91 Informed consent requirements
(cf 1990 Act, s 183)
(1) A person is taken to have given informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy if the person gives a free, voluntary and written consent after this section is complied with.(2) The following steps must be taken before consent is obtained:(a) a fair explanation must be made to the person of the techniques or procedures to be followed, including an identification and explanation of any technique or procedure about which there is not sufficient data to recommend it as recognised treatment or to reliably predict the outcome of its performance, (b) a full description must be given, without exaggeration or concealment, to the person of any possible discomforts and risks of the treatment (including possible loss of memory), (c) a full description must be given to the person of any expected benefits of the treatment
(d) a full disclosure must be made, without exaggeration or concealment, to the person of any appropriate alternative treatments that would be advantageous to the person, (e) an offer must be made to the person to answer any inquiries concerning the procedures or any part of them, (f) the person must be given notice that the person is free to refuse or to withdraw consent and to discontinue the procedures or any part of them at any time, (g) a full disclosure must be made to the person of any financial relationship between the person proposing the administration of the treatment or the administering medical practitioner, or both, and the facility in which it is proposed to administer the treatment, (h) the person must be given notice of their right to obtain legal and medical advice and to be represented before giving consent
(i) any question relating to the techniques or procedures to be followed that is asked by the person must have been answered and the answers must appear to have been understood by the person, (j) a form setting out the steps in this subsection is to be given to the person and an oral explanation of the matters dealt with in the form is to be given to the person in a language with which the person is familiar. (3) The regulations are to prescribe forms setting out the steps to be taken before obtaining informed consent to electro convulsive therapy.
92 Person impaired by medication incapable of giving informed consent
(cf 1990 Act, s 184)
A person is presumed to be incapable of giving informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy if, when consent is sought, the person is affected by medication that impairs the person’s ability to give that consent.
93 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered to persons other than involuntary patients
(cf 1990 Act, s 185)
(1) Electro convulsive therapy may be administered to a person (other than an involuntary patient) if:(a) the person is capable of giving informed consent to the treatment and has given informed consent to the treatment, including a written consent in the form prescribed by the regulations, and (b) a certificate is given under this section by at least 2 medical practitioners, at least one of whom is a psychiatrist. (2) A certificate under this section is a certificate in writing that, after considering the clinical condition and history of treatment of, and any appropriate alternative treatments for, the person, the medical practitioners are of the opinion that electro convulsive therapy is:(a) a reasonable and proper treatment to be administered to the person, and (b) necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the person. (3) An authorised medical officer who is unsure whether a person is capable of giving informed consent may apply to the Tribunal for an ECT consent inquiry to determine whether the person is capable of giving informed consent and has given that consent.
94 When electro convulsive therapy may be administered to involuntary patients
(1) Electro convulsive therapy may be administered to an involuntary patient in accordance with an ECT determination made by the Tribunal at an ECT administration inquiry.(2) An authorised medical officer may apply to the Tribunal for an ECT administration inquiry about an involuntary patient if a certificate is given under this section by at least 2 medical practitioners, at least one of whom is a psychiatrist.(3) A certificate under this section is a certificate in writing that, after considering the clinical condition and history of treatment of, and any appropriate alternative treatments for, the patient, the medical practitioners are of the opinion that electro convulsive therapy is:(a) a reasonable and proper treatment to be administered to the patient, and (b) necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the patient.
95 Tribunal to hold inquiries promptly
The Tribunal must hold an ECT inquiry about a person as soon as practicable after an application is made to it under this Division.
96 Purpose and findings of ECT inquiries
(1) ECT consent inquiries about voluntary patients
The Tribunal is, on an ECT consent inquiry, to determine whether or not the person is capable of giving informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent.
(2) ECT administration inquiries about involuntary patients
The Tribunal is, on an ECT administration inquiry, to determine whether or not an ECT determination should be made in relation to the patient about whom the inquiry is held.
(3) ECT determinations that enable treatment of involuntary patients
An ECT determination is a determination:(a) that the patient is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent, or (b) that:(i) the patient is incapable of giving informed consent or is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy but has refused, or has neither consented nor refused, to have the treatment administered, and (ii) after considering the medical opinions and other information placed before it, the Tribunal is satisfied the electro convulsive therapy is a reasonable and proper treatment and is necessary and desirable for the safety or welfare of the patient.
(4) Maximum number of treatments for involuntary patients
In any ECT determination, the Tribunal must also specify the number of treatments that are approved (not exceeding 12).
(5) Increase in maximum number of treatments for involuntary patients
Despite subsection (4), the Tribunal may specify more than 12 treatments if the Tribunal is satisfied that, having regard to the special circumstances of the case (including the success of any previous electro convulsive therapy), the higher number of treatments is justified.
(6) Procedures applying to ECT inquiries
For the purposes of an ECT inquiry, the Tribunal is to do the following:(a) in the case of an ECT administration inquiry, find out from the patient about whom the inquiry is being held whether or not the patient was aware of the authorised medical officer’s obligation to give notice of the inquiry and whether notice of the inquiry was given in accordance with this Act, (b) inform the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held of the nature and possible results of the inquiry, if the patient or person has not or appears not to have been informed of them, (c) inquire about the administration of any medication to the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held and take account of its effect on the patient’s or person’s ability to communicate, (d) consider the views of the patient or person about whom the inquiry is being held about the treatment, (e) consider any information before it.
(7) Duration of ECT determination
An ECT determination has effect for 6 months from the date the determination is made unless a shorter period is specified in the determination.
97 Electro convulsive therapy register
(1) A register containing information relating to the administration of electro convulsive therapy is to be kept in relation to each mental health facility or other place at which the treatment is administered.(2) The medical superintendent of the facility or the person approved by the Director-General for any other place is to keep the register or cause it to be kept.(3) The register is to be in the form prescribed by the regulations.(4) Particulars of a proposed administration of electro convulsive therapy are to be entered in the register before the therapy is administered, and any differences in the particulars of treatment actually administered are to be subsequently noted and explained in the register.(5) The register may be inspected at any time by the Tribunal, the Principal official visitor, an official visitor or the Director-General.
“ELECTROSHOCK IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY AND IT MUST BE BANNED UNIVERSALLY NOW”
