Mental health law plan challenged

Ministers are facing defeat in the House of Lords over plans to allow mentally ill people to be detained even if this does not help their condition. The Mental Health Bill would mean people with severe personality disorders could be confined if judged to be a threat to themselves or others. The bill would also allow compulsory treatment in the community.

Critics argue the measures are too draconian and could lead to people not coming forward for treatment.

Conservative, Lib Dem and non-aligned peers have jointly tabled a series of amendments to the plans, so are expected to be able to defeat the government. At the opening of the debate Conservative Earl Howe told peers: "It [the bill] allows individuals who have committed no crime to be detained and committed under compulsion and subjected to treatments that are highly invasive." He added that it was essential to "set the parameters of acceptable behaviour on the part of health professionals". Patients who were coerced felt "dreadful trauma and deep humiliation", Earl Howe said.

Lib Dem Baroness Barker said a "clear statement of principles" on how the law and mental health workers' code of practice worked together was needed, to avoid "continued confusion".

The slimmed-down Mental Health Bill is the latest in a series of attempts by the government since 1998 to change the laws. At the moment people cannot be detained against their will - even if they are a danger to themselves or others - if that detention and treatment could not be shown to benefit their condition.

The government wants to change those rules so people could be detained and treated if medical treatment, which is appropriate to the patient's mental disorder "and all other circumstances of their case", is available. Also controversial is the plan to bring in supervised community treatment, which aims to ensure patients comply with their treatment once they are discharged from hospital. Health Minister Lord Warner has said the aim of the bill is to protect the public and patients from harm.

Michael Stone's 1998 conviction for the murders of Lin and Megan Russell first prompted the government to propose new laws. Stone was regarded as a dangerous psychopath but, because his condition was untreatable, he could not be held under mental health powers.

The bill comes after previous attempts to change the existing Mental Health Act 1983 were abandoned in the face of opposition from mental health campaigners and some doctors. They object, among other issues, to the bill being too occupied with public safety rather than the needs of the people who might require help. The peers say they do not want the bill dropped, but want their amendments accepted by the government.

The changes would affect an estimated 14,000 of the 600,000 people who use mental health services each year.