The High Court has found that a 24-year-old man was a voluntary patient at the psychiatric unit of Midlands Regional Hospital Portlaoise from 1pm on 15 April 2023 until he told a consultant psychiatrist he wanted to leave on the morning of 17 April. It ruled he was not unlawfully deprived of his liberty during that period and that his involuntary admission afterwards was lawful.
Mr Justice Barr delivered the ruling on 28 April 2023 following an inquiry under Article 40.4.2 of the Constitution into the legality of the man’s detention. The central issue was whether he had been free to leave after a consultant psychiatrist declined to make an involuntary admission order because of defects in the paperwork supporting his initial admission.
The man said he was never told he could leave and that staff repeatedly refused his requests to go. He testified that he would have left if told he was free to do so. The hospital’s evidence was that Dr Mubashar Hassan explained the paperwork problem, said the man needed treatment and asked if he would remain voluntarily. Dr Hassan said the man agreed. He accepted that he did not use the words “You are free to go”.
The judge accepted Dr Hassan’s evidence and contemporaneous notes recording that the man had agreed to stay and might need to be detained under the Mental Health Act 2001 if he tried to leave. The court also accepted evidence from the man’s key worker and other hospital staff that he had not expressed a wish to leave to them over the weekend. The judge considered the man’s evidence that he had asked to leave, but found it vague and noted errors in his recollection of who had seen him and whether security staff were employed at the hospital.
On 17 April, the man told Professor Henry O’Connell that he wanted to leave. Professor O’Connell considered that he had a mental disorder requiring involuntary admission and initiated the procedure under sections 23 and 24 of the 2001 Act. A second consultant psychiatrist confirmed the opinion, and an admission order was made.
The court concluded that the man was voluntary until he expressed a wish to leave Professor O’Connell, and that the later involuntary admission was effected lawfully under the Act.