Mary Butler
Waterford · Fianna Fáil · Ireland
“Major improvements are happening across services: enhanced access to proactive and preventive healthcare to support a better quality of life; the embedding and upscaling of women's health initiatives put in place through the implementation of the previous women's health action plans, including, as the Senator knows, free contraception, sp…”
“In relation to any proposal, a proposal for a new location requires a detailed business case, a premises, support from the regional HSE management, and the necessary funding to resource the staffing of the service. That is where I come into it and what I will be trying to do.”
“We are currently working closely with it to support the expansion of Jigsaw services to Waterford and the south east, as well as to County Clare. The location of Waterford was picked because we have no services in the south east at all. It is great that we will have the hub and spoke model the Senator spoke about.”
“That is where I do not agree with the Senator. I believe €180 million of funding ring-fenced for women's health, when we have come from a low base, is absolutely unbelievable.”
“The plan will build on our knowledge of women's health through research and innovation and will spotlight important areas such as endometriosis and cardiovascular health. Recently, the Minister announced €2 million in funding for women's health research.”
“This plan will continue to focus on how we can improve access to specialist endometriosis care and treatment. As the Senator knows, we have established two super-regional specialist centres, one in Tallaght University Hospital and another in Cork, alongside the development of five regional endometriosis hubs.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,499 lines we hold for Mary Butler, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 16 of 50.
“It could be something as simple as that so that they can live the best life they possibly can. I am with the Senator 100% on this. I cannot tell her how much I am with her on this. That is why I had the meeting yesterday morning during a really busy day. It was so I can get a complete understanding of how quickly we can make this happen. I will keep the Senator informed on the progress in that regard. As I said, another meeting is going to happen next week. I have asked them to come back to me with guidelines as to how many staff they need, the cost and how fast they can ramp it up because it is not happening quick enough for me at the moment. In fairness, I want to thank Georgina from the patient advocacy services. She gave me a lot of information yesterday.”
“However, I specifically want to focus immediately on the many people who are living in community houses the length and breadth of the country with enduring mental health conditions. That is the first part of the legislation I want to enact. They are probably very well looked after, but I do not know. I do not know what kind of premises they are living in. There is a lot of information that we do not know. All of the regional executive officers, REOs, are doing an audit across the entire country. In the main, I expect that these people are looked after extremely well because a lot of them have families. At the same time, however, they have to have access to make a complaint if they want to. The complaint could be that somebody might like to attend the men's shed for a half day a week and is not allowed to do it.”
“It is not quite as straightforward as just going into an acute hospital setting when somebody has a mental disorder and is very clearly unwell with mental illness. There is scoping work going on there at the moment on how it would look for them. At the same time, I have asked them to move as quickly as possible. I want to compliment my special adviser, Ian, on all the work he has done in supporting me with this Stage of the Bill. He is going to engage with national advocacy services and the patient advocacy service next week to see how quickly we can stand it up. As I said, I am aware of all the governance that is available from the Mental Health Commission in our approved centres.”
“The 2006 approved centre regulations include a regulation related to complaints procedures. These regulations will be replaced under the new enactment, and I expect that significantly more detail in relation to complaints procedures will be included in the new regulations. As I said, I met yesterday with the patient advocacy service and got an idea of what is happening. There are 44 people currently working in patient advocacy services - not the national advocacy services, but in patient advocacy service. This information is impossible because it is happening the length and breadth of the country. The first question I asked was whether we have full geographical coverage, and we do. In order for them to ramp up into mental health services, however, there is a scoping exercise going on.”
“It is essential that when any person is receiving healthcare supports, whether for his or her mental or physical health, he or she should have access to supports he or she needs to make a complaint if they are not happy with his or her care. It is just a given that this has to happen. The Bill already strengthens the requirement that people receiving treatment in a registered acute mental health centre be given information in relation to the complaints procedure in the centre. That is true for either involuntary or voluntary detention. It might have been lost at times in the involuntary detention piece where people are not in a position to do that. In relation to the care plans we spoke about yesterday and the nominated person who can support people now in their care journey, that is really important.”
“I understand exactly where the Senator is coming from. I want to acknowledge that lady who shared her lived experience and spoke about her 23 years in services and the challenges she had. I speak to a lot of people, too, who have had good experiences, and the Senator has acknowledged that, but we have come a long way over 23 years when we think of the Bill in 2001, which the current Taoiseach brought through the Houses. We have spoken about it many times and here I am now in 2026 with a Bill that started its journey through the Houses 17 months ago. There has been a huge amount of work in collaboration with the Department of justice and the Department of children.”
“I am happy to engage with the Senator on that and to engage with any of the Senators who have concerns in relation to parts that will not be in primary legislation. My door will be open. I just wanted to put that on the record.”
“We are moving very quickly to commence patient advocacy services. We will commence as soon as the Bill is enacted. I want to start with community residences because this is an area that has not governance whereas approved centres have a huge amount of governance already under the Mental Health Commission. I want to get that done as quickly as possible. Part of the work will be examining the existing complaints structures and reviewing how best to regulate complaints structures in mental health services. As the Bill progresses towards enactment, work has commenced in my Department to look at creating a programme of work ahead of commencement. All existing regulations, including the regulation on complaints procedures, will be examined in due course prior to commencement.”
“Furthermore, I do not believe that a review of complaints procedures should take place after the commencement of this Bill. If such a review is required, it should take place before the commencement of the Bill. As soon as we are finished here on the Bill, my team in the Department will move to the enactment stage. Review and a complaints mechanism will all be looked at. I give the Senator a guarantee on that. The HSE is currently looking at Your Service, Your Say in relation to a complaints mechanism because we all have had queries in relation to it and how it works. Again, the intention is not to write it into primary legislation but to deal with it by means of secondary legislation. I think a complaints procedure is really important. As I said, I met patient advocacy services yesterday morning with Georgina.”
“Most of the amendments in this grouping relate to Government amendments and are being introduced to correct section references or typographical errors. For example, amendment No. 320 changes the section reference from section 128 to section 152, as section 152 is the appropriate section for conditions to be attached under. A lot of tidying up is going on in the Bill now because we have had so many amendments. Amendment No. 325 is necessary following amendments to Part 3, Chapter 3 to reflect the role of the registered proprietor of a service in being responsible for making applications to the Circuit Court in certain circumstances. I do not support Opposition amendment No. 336, tabled by Senator Black, because I do not believe it is appropriate to primary legislation.”
“I will be brief. It is not that I disagree. I agree with the Senator’s sentiment but I cannot support amendment No. 319 as it is unnecessary. Community mental health services are already defined in section 2 of the Bill and so accepting this amendment would cause issues of duplication. I have no problem at all with the thrust of what the Senator said but it would be duplication as it is already there. I thank her for that and for her explanation.”
“I will not come back on Report Stage with this. I am not going to pretend I will. However, I am fully supportive of the sentiment and will certainly look at it in secondary legislation. I think it is important that there is clarity here. Some centres do not get three-year registrations. Some get two years and some get one year - it depends - but I think it is important that every centre is visited in every calendar year.”
“It was informed at 5 o'clock and was on site at 7 o'clock. The commission is still finalising the report, which I expect to receive very soon. I have full confidence in it from that perspective. This also relates to something I did in relation to HIQA. Every nursing home is inspected at least once in a calendar year and 95% of all inspections are unannounced. Unannounced inspections are a significant part. I tried to write that into the HIQA legislation but I could not do so because the follow-up inspections would not normally be unannounced, given that inspectors want to meet individual people and, therefore, have to announce it. As a result, it could not be written into the legislation. A total of 95% inspections by HIQA are unannounced and the majority of inspections by the Mental Health Commission are unannounced.”
“I have already provided resources for more staff than ever before and when the Bill is enacted, more staff will have to be provided because they are 66 approved centres across the country at the moment, but when all 81 CAMHS teams are included in that, they will need a lot more support. The commission plans to inspect each service at least twice per registration period. The current wording provides the right level of flexibility for the commission to prioritise its inspection resources and home in on services that have issues with compliance. I will not go into it but I will touch on it briefly. When I was made aware of the situation in Bloomfield along with my Department and my officials, within two hours of the commission being informed of the situation in Bloomfield it was on site. I could not ask for more than that.”
“I thank the Acting Chairperson for being in the Chair today. I understand the Senator's amendments have been ruled out of order but, as he said, that decision was not made by me or my officials. I received these amendments earlier this week and asked my officials to correspond with the Mental Health Commission for its view on them. While the Bill as presented states that the inspector will inspect every inpatient service at least once within the registration period, I understand the commission plans to inspect each service at least twice per registration period, of which I am fully supportive. I understand this also how the commission will inspect the community residences, that is, twice a year.”
“A consultant psychiatrist is a fully qualified and experienced medical doctor who specialises in diagnosing and treating mental illness. That is the necessary authority and perspective for the role. It may be that there can be circumstances in community settings but that would certainly not be the case in an inpatient facility.”
“Considering the central role of psychiatrists in the involuntary admission of people to inpatient mental health services and the central role of psychiatry in mental health services, it makes sense that the clinical director of an inpatient mental health service be a consultant psychiatrist and that the chief inspector of mental health services continue to be a consultant psychiatrist. I was not aware we were in critically short supply of consultant psychiatrists. We have some vacancies, but it is not an issue the Irish College of Psychiatry has raised with me. I cannot support amendments Nos. 313, 330 and 331. A responsible consultant psychiatrist is required, as the role demands the clinical expertise, medical knowledge and independent judgment necessary to inspect and report on the quality of mental health services.”
“As Senators may be aware, a consultant psychiatrist is the only person who can make an order to detain someone involuntarily under the Mental Health Act. It is a huge responsibility and must only be done as a last resort. When a person is under the care of a consultant psychiatrist, that psychiatrist is responsible for that person and has legal responsibility for their care and treatment. This means the psychiatrist is the person who is liable for the person receiving treatment.”
“The regulations will be comprehensive and will deal with how complaints have been made. The Department will also look at advocacy that can be provided. As I said, I met with patient advocacy services this morning. I want to see it rolled out as soon as possible. However, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the Bill also requires that every admitted person must be given information about the services complaints mechanism. Regarding Your Service Your Say, I have dealt with people who have had a good outcome from it and many who have not. At the same time, that is the system we have across the HSE at the moment, and there is an awful lot that we are going to deal with in secondary legislation. I will not be found wanting in doing that.”
“If it is a requirement as part of the pre-commencement work on the Bill to research existing complaints, procedures and services, I will direct officials in my Department to look at this as part of the commencement plan. The Bill strengthens the requirement that people receiving treatment in a registered acute mental health centre be given information in relation to the complaints procedure in the centre. That is in the Bill. This is true for both involuntarily and voluntarily admitted people. The 2006 approved centre regulations include a regulation related to a complaints procedure. These regulations will be replaced under the new enactment, and I expect significantly more detail in relation to complaints procedures will be included in the new regulations.”
“Children are presenting with more complex needs and they are a lot longer in services than they used to be. Previously, when a child came into a service, another child was leaving. That is not the case anymore, and that is why waiting lists are always inclined to go up over the winter period. I do not know for what reasons they always fall during the summer, but it is one area I am keeping a close eye on. In relation to amendment No. 312, and Senator Black spoke to this as well, I do not believe this requires an amendment in primary legislation. It is not appropriate to dictate what the commission carries out in this report.”
“All the teams get additional funding to try to manage their waiting lists, especially those over 12 months. What I was really pleased with was they were doing dialectical behavioural therapy, DBT, with families, and the whole family was included in supporting the young person. I have seen really good practice, and it is not fair to say we have not. We also have to appreciate that the additional referrals that we have seen to CAMHS teams in the past five years have been unprecedented. The population has grown. We had a situation back in 2016 or 2017 where we had 900,000 young people in Ireland and we now have 1.2 million. That is an increase of 20%. Services are going to be under pressure. I digress but I just thought it was important to put it on the record that we have a huge amount of really good work happening.”
“I was very struck after the Maskey report, when I asked the Mental Health Commission and the HSE to do an independent audit and review, that an awful lot of the CAMHS teams work in independent silos and are not supporting each other, even in the same counties. I did not see that in Donegal or Limerick but I have seen it in other areas. I visited one particular facility where one CAMHS team was only accepting emergencies and another CAMHS team had capacity. I actually asked for one team to support the other and I did not get a positive outcome. That is the reason I travelled. As I said, I will be issuing a report on it to the HSE to let it know the reasons I am disappointed and reasons I am pleased. Lucena in the Kildare area is doing an absolutely phenomenal job.”
“I provided funding of €1.3 million this year to deliver that on what we call the peninsula, because it is so far removed from an awful lot of services. I was struck by the way they all work together. I visited CAMHS teams that are located in the most beautiful primary care centres, with 16 or 17 members of staff, with the highest waiting lists in the country, and not the highest catchment areas. I am trying to get under the bonnet of how some CAMHS teams perform extremely well. I cannot understand how we can then have teams that are not doing well, and while I do not want to start saying where they are, anyone can look at the data.”
“Other areas have more, but with a dedicated focus led by a consultant down there, Dr. Eithne Foley, it has managed to turn the whole situation around, working closely with the regional executive officer in that area. We need to give good practice a shout-out as well. I travelled to Donegal for a full day and met with all those providing mental health supports there. I was extremely struck by the way the three CAMHS teams work together and by the fact that I was located in one area and the clinical director from the department of psychiatry came to meet me. Three GP left their practices to come to meet me. They are all pulling together. Their ask was for a crisis resolution team in Donegal and a Solace café.”
“In relation to what we are trying to achieve, I visited 21 CAMHS teams just before Christmas. For about six months, I took to the road and travelled all over. I am trying to understand why some CAMHS teams are performing extremely well. We have approximately 770 people working in CAMHS. We have 80 consultant psychiatrists, clinical psychologists and multidisciplinary teams all over the country. However, when we compare and contrast CAMHS teams, I have to give a shout-out to Limerick, for example, which has just done an unbelievable job of turning it all around and now holds 3.5% of the waiting list in the whole country. Limerick reduced its over 12-month waiting list by 89% and its up to nine months waiting list by 59%. Limerick has eight CAMHS teams in that particular area.”
“The work is already under way, and the commission has formed a working group and is actively working towards delivering the standards this year. The standards will help inform the future regulation of community camps. That is the complete independence of it. It is doing that at the moment. Members will actually have seen that the organisation reached out on social media looking for people who have had experience of having their child in CAMHS or who have been in the care of CAMHS themselves. They could be involved and there is an opportunity for them to make a submission to that. Regarding the reference to CAMHS in this amendment, CAMHS is not defined anywhere in the Bill, nor are the child and youth mental health services, CYMHS. I would not be in a position to start putting it in now.”
“The allocation of State resources is solely the responsibility of the Government of the day, made up by the elected Members of the Oireachtas. It would be entirely inappropriate to place the responsibility of delivering services and-or allocating State resources on the Mental Health Commission. It just would not be possible. I have a very good working relationship with the Mental Health Commission. I have had my disagreements with it as well, let me tell you, over the past five years, as have my officials in the Department. However, in relation to CAMHS, I wrote to the commission last year, when the Bill was going through the Dáil, to request that it begin working on developing national standards that will apply to child adolescent mental health services.”
“We do not ask HIQA to do that, for example. It is important to look at what exactly the role of the commission is. The role of the commission is to regulate mental health services, including the inspection of mental health services, promote the improvement of mental health services by setting standards for best practice in those services, encourage adherence to those standards, promote public awareness of the regulation of mental health services and other matters provided for under this Act, and take all reasonable steps to protect the rights and interests of persons detained in registered acute mental health centres. It is not the role of the commission to deliver services or to dictate how State resources should be allocated.”
“I will speak to both amendments. They have been grouped together because the commission is mentioned, but they are quite different so I will speak to both of them individually, if that is okay. First, in relation to the Senator’s amendment, this was presented on Committee Stage in the Dáil and I have looked at it, but my position remains unchanged and I will tell the Senator why. I do not think it is appropriate for primary legislation. The commission is independent in its functions, and I would have concerns about dictating in primary legislation what the commission must include in its annual report. Second, the commission is not responsible for implementing mental health services. It would be inappropriate for the commission to be responsible for estimating the required number of staff members or funding in mental health services.”
“These amendments are typographical and insert the word "the" where required. Amendment No. 316 replaces an incorrect subsection reference. Amendment No. 317 corrects the definition of "committee of inquiry" to add that it is for use of section 335 only. Amendment No. 318 replaces the term "the inquiry" with "carrying out an inquiry". They are all typographical. They are all related to wording.”
“To flag it for the Senator's diaries, if we can have the agreement of the Seanad in relation to its diary, we will be looking at the week when we come back on 18 March after St. Patrick's Day if that is possible. We need about four weeks to get this piece of it sorted.”
“The Child Care Act does not differentiate between children under 16 and over 16. That is the important piece. That is why Tusla must be informed regardless of age. In relation to children over 16 coming from family homes, parents will be notified if it is in the best of the child. The Department is continuing to refine notification provisions before Report Stage. This is a complicated piece of the Bill. A lot of work is going on in the background. I met with the Office of the Parliamentary Counsel, OPC, at 2.30 p.m. today to discuss certain elements of the Bill that are still live. We will certainly consider the Senator's suggestion. We will engage with her on what she has asked for before we get to the notification provisions, which will be discussed on Report Stage.”
“Comparing the contents of the 2001 Act and the contents of this Bill, I think we have really strict criteria now. When the Bill details who can order, initiate and apply a seclusion or restraint, that goes a long way. When a person contravenes the provision, he or she is liable to be convicted. That is extremely strong. It is an area that we have not discussed much. We are just coming to the latter end of the Bill now. This was a piece that needed to be included. A lot of work has been done on this particular section to make sure that it is right. It is much stronger than what we had previously.”
“The following is really important. Where a person contravenes the provision of the Act or a regulation in relation to a restrictive practice, he or she is liable to be convicted. Share the Vision includes a recommendation to adopt a zero seclusion and zero restraint approach in mental health services. As I outlined last week, there has been a significant reduction in the usage of seclusion and restraint in mental health services. According to the Mental Health Commission, so these are not my words, Ireland ranks among the lowest in comparable countries for the use of seclusion and restraint. The use of seclusion and restraint must always be accompanied by very strong legal safeguards, particularly so when it comes to a child. The Bill provides for that.”
“In relation to children, and this is extremely important, a seclusion or restraint can only be applied where it is in the best interest of the child, in rare and exceptional circumstances, where there is no safe alternative, where it is the least restrictive practice possible in the circumstances, where it is proportionate to the assessed immediate threat of serious harm, for the shortest duration possible. The Bill details who can order, initiate and apply a seclusion or restraint. The Bill also contains information on record-keeping, notification to the commission and to any nominated person, and a requirement to continue to communicate with the person the subject of the restraint or seclusion. Importantly, any use of seclusion or restraint must comply with regulations made by the Mental Health Commission.”
“The Mental Health Act 2001 contained very little information in relation to restrictive practices for children and for adults. Section 69 simply states at the moment, in relation to seclusion and bodily restraint, that such seclusion or restraint can only be carried out in accordance with rules to be made by the Mental Health Commission. A person who contravenes these rules is liable for conviction, and this applied to both adults and children. As Senators will be aware, the Mental Health Bill 2024 overhauls our approach to the use of restrictive practices and contains many more legal safeguards and protections for adults and children. There are two separate chapters in Parts 3 and 4 of the Bill. The Bill sets out strict criteria that must be made before a seclusion or restraint can be initiated.”
“305 deletes section 90(3), as this is now included in new section 91 in relation to the role of parents, guardians and Tusla, where appropriate, on the use of restrictive practices. Amendment No. 306 replaces an incorrect subsection reference. Amendment No. 309 inserts a new section 91 that provides for the will and preferences of the child - we will have discussed this earlier on - to be taken into account in relation to the use of restrictive practices on children, and that the child and their nominated person, parent, guardian or Tusla, where appropriate, are informed of its use and a record of the child’s views recorded in their medical records and care plan. This provides an additional safeguard where a restrictive practice is being used.”
“I will speak to amendments Nos. 303 to 306 inclusive and 309, which have been grouped together and relate to restrictive practices on children. Amendment No. 303 inserts explicit reference to including the "best interests and the welfare of the child" as the primary consideration - we would have spoken about this earlier, Senator Boyhan - along with the guiding principles for children in section 10, in any regulations made by the Mental Health Commission for the application of a restrictive practice for a child in a registered acute mental health centre. Amendment No. 304 replaces section 90(1), separating it out into two subsections to provide clarity in relation to the notification of the use of a restrictive practice. It is tightening up what we have already discussed. Amendment No.”
“Officials in my Department discussed this provision with the HSE, including the HSE child and youth mental health office. In some cases, when a child is being involuntarily admitted, they will not be coming from the most stable home environment. Their parents may be dealing with mental health issues themselves, addiction or simply may not be in a position to make decisions about treatment on behalf of their child. The section is being introduced to ensure that, in some cases, children can still be treated. As I said, this was an issue raised with us. To clarify, it is the District Court which may act as the substitute decision maker for that limited period and only where there is an absence of consent. If the young person can give consent, it does not apply.”
“In such cases, the child would be admitted but there would be no one to make a decision on his or her behalf. Therefore, the child could not be treated or supported to make the care plan we spoke about. This new section addresses this issue and ensures there are appropriate protections in place for the child and for the parent or guardian of that child. The District Court may act as a substitute decision maker for a limited period and only where there is an absence of consent. This provision cannot be used where there is a disagreement between the parents and the clinician on treatment, and that is really important. This amendment is absolutely necessary and will ensure children with parents who are unable to consent are not disadvantaged.”
“In the first instance, I wish to speak to amendment No. 297. This amendment provides for a new section in relation to applications to the family District Court for treatment orders in certain circumstances. This is an important provision and is needed to ensure there is a substitute decision maker in place for children where there is an absence of consent or refusal. For example, an application may be made to the District Court to act as substitute decision maker on behalf of a child where the child is under 16 years of age or is over 16 and lacks capacity to consent or refuse treatment, and where there is either no legal parent of the child in place or where the parent is unable to or fails to make a decision to consent to or to refuse treatment.”
“For me to be happy, I will take it away and look at it. I thank the Senator for raising it. The definitions are there for a registered acute mental health centre. I know everybody wants to make sure there is no unintended consequences, and I appreciate that. I will take it away and I will be back tomorrow. I will look at it, and if it needs to be changed on Report Stage, I will do that.”
“I cannot tell him whether a family has chosen to bring their child to some place privately, so if we were to legislate that no child would be treated abroad, I could not do it for that reason. Not everybody chooses to use the HSE for their health services. Some people choose private healthcare or choose to go down a different route. I could not close that off. We spoke about ECT last week. ECT has not been administered to any child here in the past ten years, for example. There is no consultant psychiatrist or CAMHS consultant who is qualified to actually do it. I will take a look at it. I am going to take it away and have a look at it between now and tomorrow as regards other places, and maybe we will see if it can be strengthened. I looked for the definition there and I could not find it quickly.”
“I have a couple of points. The term "other places" is used in the 2001 Act and there have not been any unintended consequences since then. It is also used in the 2024 Bill regarding adults, so we just kept the same language going. A registered acute mental health centre is defined in the Bill as only an inpatient service registered by the commission. By definition, it cannot be a transfer to somewhere that is not registered by the commission; that just cannot happen. As I said, any transfer would be for the purpose of giving the child treatment that is not available in the mental health service. I am here moving a Bill regarding services provided by the HSE. I have told the Senator the HSE has not referred a child under 18 since 2018, when the model of care came in for eating disorders.”
“I have heard a lot of talk about Kyrie Farm, for example. That is a private provider per se . That is what I am talking about. In relation to another place, it will not be outside the State. The intention is for children to be transferred to an accident and emergency department or somewhere in the State if they require treatment. It is just so that there will be no doubt in relation to what should happen in a case of a child involuntarily detained in the care of Tusla or the State and, if there was nobody to bring that child to another facility, what the facility is. The facility will always be determined by a clinician to find the best appropriate setting for the child to be looked after. I hope that answers the Senators' questions. I did not quite get them all. If they want to come back to me, they may.”
“Nua Healthcare, for example, is one of the providers. The HSE, as it says to me, is not a landlord but it does have some houses and it leases some houses. I met patient advocacy services this morning. Senator Black will be interested in this. We spoke about national advocacy services and patient advocacy services. Sometimes people who are under the care of disability services have mental health issues as well. They are able to access patient advocacy services at the moment - about 10% of people with mental health issues. It was great to be able to have that discussion today. Service providers are trained operators. Nua Healthcare provides a lot of supports for people with disabilities, as we know, who need one-on-one support. There are also cases where we have some service providers in relation to mental health.”
“Amir Niazi again because he gives me so much advice and support. He is the clinical lead for all the clinical programmes for under-18s. Since the model of care was introduced in 2018 for eating disorders, no child has had to be treated outside the State. We all know that there is a treatment abroad scheme that can be accessed for adults, for example. They could be treated abroad, but it may not be in relation to their mental health. You could have a situation in relation to that. When we talk about service providers, these are trained operators. For example, a lot of people live in community residences all over the country. During mental health conditions, these residences will be regulated because of this Bill, which is one of the first pieces I am going to move to do. These are in the care of the HSE. Sometimes the HSE outsources.”
“I assume, when the new children's hospital opens, we will have to amend the Bill to include that. Amendment No. 265 provides for a new section 78 in relation to the transfer of an involuntarily admitted child where they need treatment in hospital or facility other than the registered acute mental health centre. Take a child who is currently involuntarily detained in an adult facility and who is going to be transferred to another centre. That is what this is allowing for. Where the child needs treatment other than in the "registered acute mental health centre", that refers to the other place we are talking about. It will never be outside the State. That is my understanding. To answer the Senator's question, I stand open to correction but I think I am right on this and we have spoken a lot about this. I refer to Dr.”
“I will do my best to answer some of the Members' questions. I thank them for raising them. Amendments Nos. 264 to 268, inclusive, and Nos. 271 and 273 are being discussed together. Amendment No. 264 provides for a new section 77 of the Bill, which sets out that where the parents of a child to be admitted voluntarily, or their guardian, or Tusla, as appropriate, are unable to bring the child to the registered acute mental health centre for admission, they can request the assistance of the centre to arrange for the transfer. They are being admitted voluntarily, so they are not under an order or anything. This would be very unlikely, to be fair. The centre is the approved centre. We have four approved centres in Ireland in relation to younger people.”