Mental Health Act 2007
96Purpose and findings of ECT inquiries
Start here
Get a plain-English read of 96
Turn the raw legal text into a practical explanation grounded in Mental Health Act 2007.
96 Purpose and findings of ECT inquiries
96 Purpose and findings of ECT inquiries
(1) ECT consent inquiries about voluntary patients The Tribunal is, on an ECT consent inquiry, to determine whether or not the person is capable of giving informed consent to the administration of electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent.
(2) ECT administration inquiries about involuntary patients or persons under 16 The Tribunal is, on an ECT administration inquiry, to determine whether or not an ECT determination should be made in relation to the patient or person under the age of 16 years about whom the inquiry is held.
(3) ECT determinations that enable treatment of involuntary patients (other than persons under 16) An ECT determination for an involuntary patient (other than a person under the age of 16 years) is a determination—
(a) that the patient is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent, or
(b) that—
(i) the patient is incapable of giving informed consent or is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy but has refused, or has neither consented nor refused, to have the treatment administered, and
(ii) after considering the medical opinions and other information placed before it, the Tribunal is satisfied the electro convulsive therapy is a reasonable and proper treatment and is necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the patient.
(3A) ECT determinations that enable treatment of persons under 16 An ECT determination for a person under the age of 16 years (including an involuntary patient) is a determination—
(a) in the case of an involuntary patient or other person, that—
(i) the person is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy and has given that consent, and
(ii) after considering the medical opinions and other information placed before it, the Tribunal is satisfied that the electro convulsive therapy is a reasonable and proper treatment and is necessary or desirable for the safety or welfare of the person, or
(b) in the case of an involuntary patient, that—
(i) the patient is incapable of giving informed consent or is capable of giving informed consent to the electro convulsive therapy but has refused, or has neither consented nor refused, to have the treatment administered, and