Dr. Michael Drumm:

I too will comment on that issue. I will try not to repeat what was said. All of the points made by Ms Vidal are exceptionally valid. From the perspective of the PSI, we are recommending that the Mental Health Commission develop regulations and codes in respect of seclusion and that breach of those would be an offence subject to a fine or conviction. If one wants to change the legislation to make it effective, that is what needs to be done. Section 69(1) of the Act governs the use of bodily restraint and seclusion. There is probably a need for seclusion and physical, medical and mechanical restraint but there needs to be clear definitions, rules and codes attached to those. They need to be used only as a last resort. In truth, the research mostly suggests their usage is usually due to the environment rather than the person. If the person has his or her own room or suite, it is a place to which he or she can go. It should be a calm and relaxing place to which he or she can go rather than being flagged as a punishment. That transforms the way it is seen and done. If there are rules and regulations attached to the usage, that makes sure it is done appropriately and not excessively.