Loading...

Mental Health

Letter sent to Justice Health

Mr Forrest

Acting Chief Executive

Justice Health and Forensic Mental Network

Dear Mr Forrest,

The Justice Action Team is writing to draw attention to the case of Mr Malcolm George Baker min 221029 and what occurred.

The Tribunal rejected the application by Justice Health for an order to retain Mr Baker in the mental health facility at Long Bay as the Tribunal found no justification for holding him in the hospital and being forcibly medicated. It agreed that Mr Baker presents no risk of serious harm to himself or others. It heard that he needed a job and an interest with social support. He was accused of being delusional as he had alleged corruption between the pharmaceutical industry and the government and said that he was being prosecuted. This was the third time the Tribunal rejected his forced medication after our intervention. This indicates a serious cultural problem in our opinion.

We would like to schedule a meeting with Justice Health in response to the Mental Health Tribunal hearing on 14th July 2016 to examine the failures and look for future solutions so it does not reoccur to him and others.

After a similar hearing by the Tribunal on April 30 last year the Tribunal similarly refused to order his retention in the Long Bay hospital. But subsequently he was held in the mental health pod of the MRRC for 15 months, with a series of unstable people in transition around him. No job, education and no chance for settling down. It wasn’t fair to him as it was destabilising, especially as he has already suffered 15 years in solitary confinement. He wanted to be mainstreamed, do something useful, and create relationships as he should be entitled to after serving 24 years. We counselled him to be patient, speaking with him every few days, believing his return to Nowra to be imminent. Despite this destabilizing situation he behaved very well, not being accused of breaching any rules.

In light of the Tribunal’s third decision, we seek support from Justice Health NSW to assist Malcolm to returnas early as possible back to Nowra with a job and people around him with whom he can relate. We are in a mentoring relationship with him and are prepared to negotiate with him if a problem does arise. We feel a social response to any tensions that would be treated effective.

Justice Action Team would like to take this opportunity to cooperate with Justice Health in designing an amicable solution for the future. When would suit you for a meeting?

Please acknowledge upon receipt,

Kind regards,

Jessica Chal

Justice Action Team

Letter sent to NSW Legal Aid

To

Mr Robert Wheeler

Mental Health Advocacy Service

Dear Mr Wheeler,

We want to draw your attention to the case of Mr Malcolm George Baker min 221029 and what occurred at his recent Tribunal Hearing on 14/7/16.

The Tribunal rejected the application by Justice Health for an order to retain Mr Baker in the mental health facility at Long Bay as the Tribunal found no justification for holding him in the hospital and being forcibly medicated. It agreed that Mr Baker presents no risk of serious harm to himself or others. It heard that he needed a job and an interest with social support. He was accused of being delusional as he had alleged corruption between the pharmaceutical industry and the government and said that he was being prosecuted

Please find ourmedia release under the email.

The hospital obstructed the defence at all stages. It refused the independent psychiatrist access to the medical records and didn’t release the Review documents until the hearing. The Tribunal claimed that it didn’t have the power to intervene. Dr Lucire pointed out that the tribunal could not deliver justice if one side was prevented from giving proper evidence. “That alone makes the legislation a sham” she said.

The top two Directors of Mental Health in Custodial Services attended the hearing as well as the psychiatrist leading the treating team. The defence was pro bono and privately funded. “There were at least 10 people in the room and the costs of such careless diagnoses need to be sheeted back to those who make them” said Dr Lucire.

Legal Aid NSW had referred us to the Mental Health Advocacy Service. However, Mr Baker felt no confidence in that service from his previous experience. We had no choice but to look elsewhere. We would like to use legal aid financial support for our focus cases as with Saeed Dezfouli. How can we make this process work to allow better outcomes for everyone in the future?

Please be sure that this email is not to criticize the judgment of Legal Aid NSW but rather to support the different approaches needed to create change. What do you think can be done?

Please acknowledge upon receipt,

Kind regards,

Jessica Chal

Justice Action Team.

How many victories are necessary to win

Malcolm Baker found himself back at Long Bay Hospital and was desperate to stop being involuntarily injected. On the 6th July 2016 he was injected again. He was injected with antipsychotic medication although it was known at the time that barrister Ben Fogarty and psychiatrist Dr. Yola Lucire had been briefed to oppose.

Ultimately the hearing on the 24th July 2016 was a success as the Tribunal found that they were not persuaded on the evidence that Malcolm Baker presented a serious risk of harm to himself or others, thus there was no justification for forced medication.

Background of the hearing
On the 8th of June 2016 the Director-General under s 55(3) of the Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) ordered Malcolm Baker to be transferred to the mental health facility at Long Bay Correctional Centre without his consent on the grounds of having a mental illness. He was being held at the Metropolitan Remand and Reception Centre (MRRC) at Silverwater prior to this transfer.

The transfer was challenged at the Mental Health Review Tribunal on the 24th July 2016 by a team of passionate advocates who argued that Malcolm Baker was not a mentally ill person as per the definition in s 14 of the Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW). Malcolm Baker presented himself reasonably to the tribunal. Ultimately the Tribunal found that whilst Malcolm Baker has the symptoms of a mental illness he did not satisfy the definition in s 14 as there was no risk of serious harm to Malcolm Baker or others to make his transfer at and treatment necessary.

Read more

‘Under Attack Again’ April 2015

After 23 years of non-violence Malcolm Baker is once again under attack. Having been moved to Long Bay Hospital Prison in February 2015, Malcolm is subjected to conditions tantamount to torture, including forced medication without justification. He is rendered semi-comatose with other severe side effects. See open letter to psychiatrist Dr Simonelli and letter to Tribunal by Malcolm 30/7/2012.  Media release April 30, 2015

Despite being settled in a correctional facility in Nowra and working in a stable job, in February 2015 Malcolm Baker was committed to an indefinite stay at Long Bay Prison Hospital. Two certificates provided the basis for Justice Health to take him to the prison hospital and forcibly inject him. The reason given was that he had sent letters with ideas and drawings to individuals such as Senator Clive Palmer. In addition to this, Justice Health said that the violent nature of Malcolm’s crime in 1992 indicated a present violent mental state.

Justice Action rejects these propositions. The reasons above are not signs of mental illness as defined by the Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW). Baker’s aversion to medication is natural given the terrible side effects he previously experienced being forced to take such medication in 2012. Writing letters to Senator Clive Palmer is not any indication of mental illness; he is a prominent political figure in Australia and writing to him is within the rights of every citizen. The Mental Health Act 2007 section 14 only allows forced medication if the individual is a risk of serious harm to themselves or others. Many prisoners have committed past violent acts, however this doesn't dictate the future. If past acts are accepted as an indication of mental illness, many more prisoners and others will be diagnosed as a risk and medicated.

The Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW) states that a transfer between correctional centres and/or mental health facilities is only lawful if two certificates are issued by medical practitioners, one of whom must be a psychiatrist. We discovered that a nurse in Nowra had cosigned the certificate, in breach of the requirement. Then on the 4th of March, Brett was denied access to the Long Bay Prison Hospital to appear alongside Malcolm as primary carer for a Tribunal hearing, to present the defence. Denying him access was a clear denial of Malcolm’s right to support. Later they said it was because Justice Health authorities failed to notify the prison as it was required to do.

Currently, Malcolm is being subjected to appalling treatment that is in breach of the basic standards of humanity and dignity as outlined in the Optional Protocol to the Convention Against Torture 2006. He is restrained bi-weekly by prison nurses and forcibly injected with anti-psychotic drugs. They result in him lying down all the time, feeling sick, slurring his words and forgetting words during the sentence he begins, having an abnormal heart rate, itchy skin and negates any sexuality. Malcolm has written a letter stating that the psychiatrist who has misdiagnosed him with a mental illness is also degrading towards him and described him as being paranoid, angry, delusional and having mood swings. Who wouldn't be unhappy?

Media release: Mental Tribunal rejects prisoner’s forced medication, for the third time

IMG_1915.jpg

The prisoner who was accused of being mentally ill for writing to MP Clive Palmer last year, has again successfully opposed the diagnostic formulations of his treating doctors. They had insisted on using enforced medication that his poor metaboliser genotype, tested in 2012, demonstrated that he could not metabolise. This is a landmark victory.

“The adverse effects of the drugs with which he was injected this time and those he was given in the past are described as ‘torture’ in the literature and by the patient. Such drugs were used to torture Soviet dissidents until 1974 because in Russia, people who opposed the government were deemed to be mentally ill under the Russian mental health act. Mr Baker was said to be suffering from delusions because one of the topics in which he has interest and about which he knew quite a bit was corruption in the pharmaceutical industry. He was desperate to stop them injecting him again and having again misdiagnosed him with paranoid schizophrenia” said psychiatrist Doctor Yola Lucire.

Justice Health said that his ideas made him vulnerable to attack from other prisoners and the medication would make him less vocal. The hospital had already held him down and injected him with antipsychotic medication although they knew barrister Ben Fogarty and psychiatrist Yolande Lucire had been briefed to oppose them in a hearing a few days later.

The Tribunal found no justification for holding Mr Baker in the hospital and being forcibly medicated. It agreed that Mr Baker presented no risk of serious harm to himself or others. It heard that he needed a job, an interest and stability. It ordered that he be removed from the hospital.

The certificates that brought Mr Baker before the Mental Health Review Tribunal were signed by two doctors who did not speak to the patient, did not disclose that fact, and did not appear at the Tribunal hearing. Evidence was given by others only one of whom had had any contact with the patient and who appeared to offended by Mr Baker's topics of conversation but did not appear to challenge his beliefs. None of those paid to monitor health delivery helped him or other prisoners. Not the Board, Legal Aid, nor the Board running the Community Reference Group. It is a disgraceful culture that they have developed, but Health has the money to buy everyone.

“Small wonder that bed requirements in NSW for the forensic patient population nearly trebled between 1992 and 2003 to accommodate a misdiagnosed population who are treated with drugs they cannot metabolise and have no possibility of recovery. This has all increased with new drugs whose side effects our doctors do not recognize” said Dr Lucire.

The hospital obstructed the defence at all stages. It refused the independent psychiatrist access to the medical records and didn’t release the Review documents until the hearing. The Tribunal claimed that it didn’t have the power to intervene. Dr Lucire pointed out that the tribunal could not deliver justice if one side was prevented from giving proper evidence. “That alone makes the legislation a sham” she said.

The top two Directors of Mental Health in Custodial Services attended the hearing as well as the psychiatrist leading the treating team. The defence was pro bono and privately funded. “There were at least 10 people in the room and the costs of such careless diagnoses need to be sheeted back to those who make them” said Dr Lucire.

During the hearing the Tribunal asked: “What would you like the doctors to do for you?” Mr Baker responded, “Just leave me alone.” Later in the hearing the Tribunal discovered that he had been shouting out at night. The 69 year old is deaf in his left ear and 25% in his right. The hospital was asked if they would fit aids for him. “After 24 years!".

For 15 of his 24 years in jail, Mr Baker had been held in effective solitary confinement in super max despite the fact that he has never been aggressive or violent in hospital although he had some adverse drug reactions when forced to take a drug associated with suicide and homicide. He had been moved from cell to cell every four weeks, and denied stability. When out of his unit, he was put in leg irons and handcuffs. He was assaulted several times when his possessions smashed while guards watched. He was told he was mentally ill and was forcibly medicated despite his requests that he be left in peace, have a job and mix with others.

After a similar hearing by the Tribunal on April 30 last year, the Tribunal ordered his removal from the hospital. But he was held in the mental health pod of the MRRC for 15 months, with a series of unstable people in transition around him, no job, education and no chance for settling down. He was set up to fail – but didn’t.

We have asked Commissioner Peter Severin to return Malcolm to Nowra.

Malcolm Baker

LATEST NEWS
Analysis of Malcolm Baker's diagnosis and decision: September 2018
Victory! Malcolm's Forced Medication Stopped: August 2018
Justice Health Failure: June 2018
Forced Medication for Management Purpose: April 2018
Latest Summary on Malcolm Baker Tribunal Hearing
Malcolm Baker Forcibly Injected Again: January 2018
Report on Medical Watchdogs' Failure: October 2016
Request to Return to Nowra: November 2016
Victory - Tribunal in Favour: July 2016

OVERVIEW
Malcolm Baker was sentenced to natural life imprisonment in 1993 for the murder of 6 people including his own son, in the space of 50 minutes, after discovering his partner with another man. He gave himself up and pleaded guilty. He has been incarcerated for 24 years, 15 of which have been served in effective solitary confinement in the High Risk Management Unit in Goulburn Correctional Centre, although he has been a model prisoner. No-one will explain why he was held there under those conditions, but police were related to victims. People who meet Malcolm appreciate him as a person, with friendly eyes and a gentle manner. He has nine children and other family who love him.

A comprehensive overview of Malcolm’s background, offences, court proceedings and convictions can be found here.

HISTORY
2015: Under Attack Again' April 2015

After 23 years of non-violence Malcolm Baker is once again under attack. Having been moved to Long Bay Hospital Prison in February 2015, Malcolm is subjected to conditions tantamount to torture, including forced medication without justification. He is rendered semi-comatose with other severe side effects. See open letter to psychiatrist Dr Simonelli and letter to Tribunal by Malcolm 30/7/2012.

See Media release April 30, 2015

2014: Malcolm was moved from Goulburn to the South Coast Correctional Facility in Nowra, where he demonstrated an ability to successfully socialise into the general prison population. However, in February 2015, Malcolm was given an unfair focus and was moved to Long Bay Prison Hospital to be forcibly given mental health treatment despite inadequate justification.

2012: Malcolm was issued a Community Treatment Order (CTO) by the Mental Health Tribunal legally enforcing him to take medication. This CTO expired on the 7th of August 2012. However, both Malcolm and Justice Action were not notified that his CTO had been discontinued until February 2014 and consequently, Malcolm continued to take and suffer from unnecessary medication without any notice from Justice Health. Moreover, Malcolm continued to be held in an A1 High Risk Security Prison even though he no longer required a CTO and had been acknowledged as displaying calm and cooperative behaviour by health and prison records.

GENERAL ISSUES
Forced Medication
Community Treatment Orders

RELATED CAMPAIGNS and DOCUMENTS
An Open Letter to the Long Bay Treatment Team
Malcolm Baker's letter to the Mental Health Review Tribunal
Malcolm Baker – A Breach of the Torture Convention

Appalling Outcome Report: Rehospitalised - 16th November 2016

Overview

The case of Michael Riley illustrates how the mental health system consistently fails to protect the rights of individuals whose behaviour is perceived as indicative of mental illness. In particular, it sheds light on how interpretations of section 14 of the Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW),1 which stipulates the definition of ‘mentally ill’, are often unsubstantiated by tangible evidence. This results in vague and imprecise outcomes. Mr Riley’s case also demonstrates how the mental health system favours immediate medication-based solutions, as opposed to social support mechanisms. Mental health institutions employ forced medication as a simple ‘fix’ rather than holistic long-term rehabilitation via support systems. In fact, as Mr Riley’s Designated Caregiver, Justice Action was not notified of his forced hospitalisation. The Mental Health Act is designed to protect individuals perceived to have a mental illness.2 Overall, Mr Riley’s situation highlights that mental health institutions show little respect for these safeguards for civil liberties.

Michael Riley was diagnosed with Schizoaffective disorder in early 2000. Since then, he has been admitted to mental health units on more than 17 occasions. Notably, there is clear agreement amongst health care professionals and family alike, that Mr Riley has never harmed anyone, nor does he pose a threat. Mr Riley lives with his mother, sister and brother-in-law. He also has a seven-year-old daughter called Anna. He has a mixed relationship with his family, who have frequently called the police and ambulance services when he has displayed behaviour indicative of mental illness. Mr Riley has a degree in Economics and Political Science from the University of Sydney. Mr Riley was completing his honours thesis when he was reported as having a mental breakdown.

Read more

The States Assault of the Mentally Ill- The Case of Michael Riley

About Michael 

Community Treatment Orders 

Right to Identity- s162 Application to Publish Name 

Media

Michael Riley is warm, bright, gentle giant in his late 30’s. He is currently employed at a union and is the loving father of a four-and-a-half year old daughter who starts school this year. While Michael lives, works and is socially engaged in the community, he is subject to a Community Treatment Order (CTO) which has been consistently renewed for 14 years. Michael does not agree with nor does he consent to this order. His diagnosis is one of Schizoaffective Disorder - a diagnosis he rejects.

Read more

The States Assault of the Mentally Ill- The Case of Michael Riley

 

About Michael 

Community Treatment Orders

Report of Meeting 20.1.14 MHRT and JUSTICE ACTION

Media

Michael Riley is warm, bright, gentle giant in his late 30’s. He is currently employed at a union and is the loving father of a four-and-a-half year old daughter who starts school this year. While Michael lives, works and is socially engaged in the community, he is subject to a Community Treatment Order (CTO) which has been consistently renewed for 14 years. Michael does not agree with nor does he consent to this order. His diagnosis is one of Schizoaffective Disorder - a diagnosis he rejects.

Michael does not have a criminal record and has no history of violent behaviour. His only contact with the police has been sparked by his CTO on the isolated occasions on which he is essentially arrested on the grounds that he is a danger to his own reputation. At times, these arrests have been carried out with such force that Michael has required hospital treatment (see ‘About Michael’ for the full story). Despite his gentle nature, Michael’s experience at the hands of the police and mental health authorities has resulted in him feeling as though he is being treated like a criminal. This is a common experience for people with mental illness and an ongoing concern for Justice Action. 

Michael’s case highlights how vulnerable a person diagnosed with a mental illness is at the hands of mental health authorities. The broad powers of the CTO take away his right to decide what treatment he wants, as well as making his liberty conditional on compliance with the terms of the CTO (s 57). In addition, a mental health team is able to medicate Michael without his consent (s 57). The power vested in mental health staff to forcibly remove Michael from the community for a breach of the CTO, transport him to a declared mental health facility (s 58) and keep him there against his will (s 61) is alarming. Perhaps most disturbing, though, is the ability of the police to intervene in Michael’s life despite the absence of any criminality.

Any resistance displayed by Michael to the terms of the CTO or the treatment forced upon him is seen as a lack of capacity or insight into what is in his best interests. Such objections are taken as confirmation of his diagnosis and act to reinforce the initial justification for the use of force. The CTO essentially takes away Michael’s ability to make his own decisions regarding his treatment and his life while a failure to comply results in his liberty being taken away.

Outraged at his brutalisation at the hands of the mental health authorities and the systemic stripping away of his fundamental human rights, Michael is prepared to talk about his experiences in order to raise awareness of the problems he has encountered in the mental health system. After years of indignity, Michaels’ frustration finally came to a head in November 2013 when his CTO was again renewed, despite the presentation of an advanced directive that had been put together to provide Michael with a community-based, supportive and therapeutic alternative to the strict and overly intrusive CTO.

He is able to clearly and articulately state his resistance to the abuses of power he has experienced. But even this choice could not be made without a battle. Due to the structure of the Mental Health Act, Michael was required to ask the Mental Health Review Tribunal for consent to use his own name in discussing his experiences – a fundamental right that is taken away under the legislation (s 68). The blanket prohibition imposed by the Act is supposedly in place for the protection of the patient who is assumed to be incapable of fully comprehending the damage they may cause themselves by associating their name with a mental illness in the public sphere. In reality, however, this prohibition, which also applies to Tribunal members, functions to reduce the accountability and transparency of the MHRT’s proceedings (see Right to Identity – s 162 Application for more information).

It is this lack of accountability and transparency that Michael is most passionate about exposing and hopefully reforming. He and Justice Action feel that unless there is a significant change in this area, people who are already at a social and often financial disadvantage will continue to have their rights and autonomy taken away from them with little avenue for effective recourse. People who are diagnosed with a mental illness require support and deserve to have their dignity maintained. Paternalistic, interventionist and overbearing systems are more likely to damage their mental state than help to nurture or repair it.

Subcategories

 

  • get involved2
  • donate
  • breakout-logo2

 

 

Justice Action
Trades Hall, Level 2, Suite 204
4 Goulburn Street
Sydney NSW 2000, Australia

T 02 9283 0123
F 02 9283 0112
E ja@justiceaction.org.au
© 2017 Breakout Media Communications
breakout-logo  womens justice network icon logo-community
donate2