Roy Heather: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Roy Heather: Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9590] 
Hon HEATHER ROY (Deputy Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the first reading of the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Amendment Bill. The ACT caucus spent a lot of time thinking about and considering this bill. We commend the Hon Winnie Laban for this initiative. It is entirely appropriate that we have this debate in this very serious manner. I know that members in the House do take this issue extraordinarily seriously. 
We have traversed the wide range of issues within our caucus from the privacy concerns right through to the right of family members to have access to information. The ACT Party will be splitting its vote on this bill and Sir Roger Douglas will speak later in support of it. The other four ACT members will be opposing the bill and I will come to the reasons for that in a moment. 
The debate is not about the stigma of mental illness. The debate is about the involvement of family in the treatment of their loved ones. Dr Paul Hutchison very carefully and thoughtfully outlined the law as it currently stands and I support the comments that he made. Clinicians do their very best under very difficult circumstances in many cases. Despite the figures and the research that both the Hon Winnie Laban and the previous speaker Jim Anderton spoke of not all families function well sadly and not all are supportive of their loved ones who have a mental illness. Sadly sometimes there does not seem to be very much love in the equation. We have to think very carefully about how to have a safe situation for all patients when they suffer from a mental illness and are not responsible for their actions. 
After having worked for a short time in the area of psychiatry and after talking to a number of clinicians who are involved today I say that sadly this bill has the potential to have unintended consequences that I do not think any member in this House would be happy with. For people who are suffering from a mental illness and who are in an abusive situation whether it is violence sexual abuse or a number of other abusive situations their family situation is not ideal and the requirement for a clinician to consult family members is not always appropriate. 
The law as it stands as Dr Paul Hutchison outlined allows for consultation with families and involvement where appropriate and the decision is allowed to be made by the clinician himself or herself. It is very important to remember that they are the experts in this case. If in deciding to consult the family we are then very rigid and prescriptive about what must follow in some instances clinicians might sadly decide that it is all too hard and not consult the family when in fact it might well be the best course of action. For MPs who are not faced with the consequences and the troubles that many people face on this daily basis that would be totally inappropriate. We also discussed the Privacy Act at length in our caucus. This Act is often used inappropriately it is often used misleadingly and it is often used as a tool sometimes to prevent information from being passed on. Although that is the case it would be inappropriate for us to cast that situation and impose a change in the law in the Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act as it stands at the moment. The issue there would be that we should deal with the Privacy Act and the implications it might have on certain situations this one being amongst them. 
In summary the ACT Party will be voting four in opposition to this bill and one in favour. The four members who will be opposing it feel that in practical terms nothing is likely to change with this legislation. Nobody is precluded from consulting families at the moment—good clinicians already do so. Sadly we fear that the unintended consequences that may result from the bill may see clinicians less likely to consult families rather than more. Thank you.