Maria Corrigan (Fianna Fail)

I join colleagues in welcoming the Minister of State. Senators referred to the fact this Bill is an effort to grapple with the balance between achieving justice and treating mental illness. It is very heartening that the Minister of State specifically responsible for both of these areas is in the Chamber and is to stay for the entirety of the debate.

As with my colleagues, I welcome the Bill. It is a very important step in ensuring we have regard to human rights. The circumstances that have obtained to date are not in anybody's interest. I refer in particular to circumstances in which individuals who may be ready for discharge from our only designated centre, the Central Mental Hospital, are not discharged because there is a lack of willingness to take responsibility for their discharge. There is concern over discharging because, as matters stand, one is either deemed cured and fit for release or not cured, in which case one must remain in the hospital. This does not really reflect the reality of mental illness. The individuals affected by the current regime are experiencing mental health challenges.

The proposals in this Bill would make provision for conditional release. It is not just a question of being released for a trial period under supervision because the conditions should stipulate the need for ongoing treatment. The proposals reflect the reality of mental illness and the supports that are required by those affected when making their way in society and trying to function to the best of their ability. They are to be welcomed.

Apart from making references to the practical difficulties faced by the Central Mental Hospital with regard to space and beds, the legislation offers the individuals concerned much better quality of life and a much better step forward. It is a step too far for one to resume normal life when supports are treatment are withdrawn quite suddenly on one's release from a supervised, structured setting such as a Central Mental Hospital. An individual in a psychiatric institution who is not legally detained would never be expected to make the step from hospitalisation to community living without any access to support. It is not realistic and was always likely to end in failure. The proposals in the Bill are much more realistic than the measures that now obtain and they offer a better chance of successful rehabilitation.

I feel the need to raise an issue that is not covered by the Bill. As a result of the present circumstances, there are in the system individuals who might have been fit for discharge a long time ago. However, because we were reluctant to release them because no conditions could be attached to their release, they were never released. The consequence is that there are a number of individuals who have become quite institutionalised and for whom discharge to community living has become a very distant and uncertain goal. Will the Minister of State consider what steps might be taken for those individuals?

Colleagues have raised the issue of capacity legislation, as I have done on numerous occasions. The Minister of State is very conscious of it. That legislation will have a very important role in the practical implementation of legislation such as that before the House and will have a bearing on the circumstances in which people find themselves.

With regard to capacity, while we are very clear about the fitness of people with mental illness to stand trial, there is a grey area in respect of those with an intellectual disability. There are individuals with an intellectual disability who have gone through the court system, received no support therein and were sentenced to imprisonment. Since they were not found to have a mental health disorder, they could not be admitted to a facility such as the Central Mental Hospital and therefore found themselves in mainstream prison settings. The Minister of State is very conscious of this, particularly in light of the plans for the future development of the Central Mental Hospital.

The mainstream prison setting is not one that a person with a mild or moderate mental handicap can be excepted to survive in or in which he can be expected to function safely. We need to address this. It will not be addressed solely by developing the new Central Mental Hospital and a similar forensic-type facility for people with intellectual disability. Legislation may have to be introduced.

One reason I raise this issue is because we have in the past admitted people with an intellectual disability to the Central Mental Hospital after their having gone through the prison system. We had very serious concerns over their ability to survive in the prison setting. When admitted to the Central Mental Hospital, they did not present with a mental illness but with an intellectual disability. They, too, have become institutionalised in the Central Mental Hospital. This is another issue for us to address.

The Minister of State said considerable demands are being placed on the Central Mental Hospital when determining whether somebody is fit for trial and when establishing an individual's mental health or well-being. He is considering the use of alternative settings and may revert to Senators on this subject on Committee Stage. If alternative settings can be used, they will be very welcome. Senator McDonald stated cases arise daily, from District Court level upwards, in which individuals who should have access to some form of psychiatric assessment are not afforded the opportunity because it is not always practical. I commend the Bill to the House.