Housing - Powers of HSE to provide accommodation

Seanachai

If the HSE was using private accommodation to house mentally ill patients because they were unable to accommodate them, would this be illegal?

Peregrinus

Seanachai wrote: »

If the HSE was using private accommodation to house mentally ill patients because they were unable to accommodate them, would this be illegal?

Not sure I understand your question. If the HSE is buying or renting residential property and using it to accommodate patients then it is, by definition, able to accommodate them.

Do you have a specific situation in mind? Can you tell us about it?

Mrs OBumble

Is there planning permission for the properties to be used for healthcare?

Peregrinus

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Is there planning permission for the properties to be used for healthcare?

The OP doesn't suggest they are being use for healthcare; just for accommodation.

But, yeah, the HSE isn't a housing agency. So why are they providing accommodation to patients?

Which is why I think the OP needs to come back and give us a bit more detail of the situation that he is enquiring about.

Owryan

Could they mean "community living"? The HSE has houses where several people with different disabilities live together within the community, usually they will have staff there to support them.

Seanachai

To clarify I meant the HSE using private accommodation like a building split into flats or an apartment block to house people, with regular tenants in the building also. Not a designated complex for people with mental health issues.

Gatling

Seanachai wrote: »

To clarify I meant the HSE using private accommodation like a building split into flats or an apartment block to house people, with regular tenants in the building also. Not a designated complex for people with mental health issues.

It's a pretty common occurrence

Mrs OBumble

Seanachai wrote: »

To clarify I meant the HSE using private accommodation like a building split into flats or an apartment block to house people, with regular tenants in the building also. Not a designated complex for people with mental health issues.

That doesn't clarify, though.

The HSE isn't responsible for providing housing - it's local councils, and various NGO's who they contract out to who do that.

The HSE is responsible for providing healthcare. If they are renting a building, or part of a building, for their use, then it needs to have planning permission for the use they are making of it - which will be more than just housing: A building which has staff present is quite a different thing, planning-wise, from a building which doesn't.

It's no different whether this is a dedicated building, or just a section of one, with other people living (or businesses operating from it) it also..

Seanachai

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

That doesn't clarify, though.

The HSE isn't responsible for providing housing - it's local councils, and various NGO's who they contract out to who do that.

The HSE is responsible for providing healthcare. If they are renting a building, or part of a building, for their use, then it needs to have planning permission for the use they are making of it - which will be more than just housing: A building which has staff present is quite a different thing, planning-wise, from a building which doesn't.

It's no different whether this is a dedicated building, or just a section of one, with other people living (or businesses operating from it) it also..

Okay, so if they were to do this through a local council is it legal? I thought that if somebody was in their care that they would need to be in a special facility?

Owryan

Seanachai wrote: »

To clarify I meant the HSE using private accommodation like a building split into flats or an apartment block to house people, with regular tenants in the building also. Not a designated complex for people with mental health issues.

Not sure what the problem is, community living would be best practice. I worked in a house that had several individuals with intellectual disabilities living in it. It was perfectly fine.

To the best of my knowledge several other charities and agencies would have similar schemes.

Owryan

Seanachai wrote: »

Okay, so if they were to do this through a local council is it legal? I thought that if somebody was in their care that they would need to be in a special facility?

We used to house individuals in "special facilities" not something to be proud of imo.

Peregrinus

Seanachai wrote: »

Okay, so if they were to do this through a local council is it legal? I thought that if somebody was in their care that they would need to be in a special facility?

No. They need to be in appropriate accommodation. What's appropriate depends on their needs, which in turn will be connected to the level of their disability.

Do they require special planning permission? It depends on what level and kind of services they are providing in the premises. If it is, in fact, supported residential accommodation, then I don't see a problem. If you don't require planning permission to have a cook or cleaner or babysitter come to the house and provide support services of those kinds, why would the HSE? Similarly you don't need planning permission before you can have, say, the district nurse come into your house to do what district nurses do. Neither does the HSE need planning permission if medical professionals come to the house to attend to the needs of residents.

It would be different, I think, if the HSE were running some kind of clinic in the house to which non-residents came for assessment or treatment.

L1011

Is it the HSE directly or a voluntary body?

Locally to me there are some larger houses owned by a voluntary body used for community care, usually one live in carer per house. They're not really used for health-care purposes in a way that I'd see needing planning permission

Seanachai

L1011 wrote: »

Is it the HSE directly or a voluntary body?

Locally to me there are some larger houses owned by a voluntary body used for community care, usually one live in carer per house. They're not really used for health-care purposes in a way that I'd see needing planning permission

I'm living in a building split into flats and there is a woman with mental health issues living in the flat above me. It has been extremely disruptive and I got confirmation that she is in fact a psychiatric patient, I can't say where I got that information, but it is legitimate. I was told by a previous tenant of my landlord that they are more than likely being paid to house this person as they either refuse to live in a care facility or there just isn't room for them.

mountai

There is no requirement for special "Planning Permission" to use a residence for housing any "Type" of individual . Thank God , as the world is full of NIMBYS.

Seanachai

mountai wrote: »

There is no requirement for special "Planning Permission" to use a residence for housing any "Type" of individual . Thank God , as the world is full of NIMBYS.

My friend if you had to endure what I've had to go through in the past couple of years you wouldn't be camping on the high ground. I can't afford to move somewhere else and my own mental health has suffered, because somebody should be in a facility where they can have proper care for their own sake and the sake of other people. This person has already removed all the batteries from the smoke alarms in the house among other things.

This is not a question of nimbyism or anything like it, people need sleep and peace in their homes.

mountai

Not "camping on high ground" as you call it . Stating a fact is all . Sorry that you are having problems as outlined , but care in the community is a hell of a lot better than locking people up in the likes of Portrane . Have you approached those that are caring for this unfortunate individual and told them of your situation?.

Owryan

So do you know the HSE are housing her, or do you think they are?

Its almost impossible these days to have someone committed against their will, if your peace is being disturbed then there are avenues such as rtb you can go down. You could talk to the landlord and advise them of the situation, if the individual is in the care of the HSE then they will know who to contact.

Plenty of people are using the services of the HSE for mental health concerns and live in the community, there is no evidence to suggest that this is not the case here imo. To me it seems you have decided that "psychiatric patients" should be locked up and kept away from the rest of society

L1011

Seanachai wrote: »

This person has already removed all the batteries from the smoke alarms in the house among other things.

Batteries? I'd be getting on to the building management to ask why the smoke alarms aren't mains, centrally controlled and properly non-removably battery backed as they should be in an apartment block first of all.


There is absolutely no planning permission or other requirement for simply housing someone as its quite clear no medical care is going on there.

Peregrinus

L1011 wrote: »

. . . There is absolutely no planning permission or other requirement for simply housing someone as its quite clear no medical care is going on there.

Indeed, it's not even clear that the HSE is involved in the provision of the accommodation at all.

All we know is that she's a psychiatric patient. Being a psychiatric patient doesn't normally involve the HSE providing you with accommodation; it just means that you're being treated for a psychiatric condition. There seems to be no reason to think that the HSE is providing accommodation in this case.

Seanachai

Owryan wrote: »

So do you know the HSE are housing her, or do you think they are?

Its almost impossible these days to have someone committed against their will, if your peace is being disturbed then there are avenues such as rtb you can go down. You could talk to the landlord and advise them of the situation, if the individual is in the care of the HSE then they will know who to contact.

Plenty of people are using the services of the HSE for mental health concerns and live in the community, there is no evidence to suggest that this is not the case here imo. To me it seems you have decided that "psychiatric patients" should be locked up and kept away from the rest of society

I would not be in favour of all psychistric patients living away from the rest of society, but in cases where they are very likely to be a noise-nuisance and potentially could harm themselves or somebody else, then yes I would prefer that they be in care. I know that anybody can be a noise nuisance but I don't think you can pursue the normal route for noise complaints if the person is deemed to not have control over their noise making.

I have informed the landlord already and he has spoken to her to no avail, she doesn't respond to appeals, which if she is mentally ill, I can understand. I've heard loud thumps early in the morning and I actually thought that she'd hung herself, I also regularly hear wailing, crying, muttering etc. The building is an old building split into flats, I would say if it was a new apartment complex with professionals living in it, there would be serious questions asked.

Seanachai

L1011 wrote: »

Batteries? I'd be getting on to the building management to ask why the smoke alarms aren't mains, centrally controlled and properly non-removably battery backed as they should be in an apartment block first of all.


There is absolutely no planning permission or other requirement for simply housing someone as its quite clear no medical care is going on there.

That is another issue, there is also virtually no soundproofing between the flats, besides the original ceiling from when it was a family home in the early 1900's. I could soundproof the ceiling but that doesn't address the issue of this person not getting the proper care that they need.

Seanachai

mountai wrote: »

Not "camping on high ground" as you call it . Stating a fact is all . Sorry that you are having problems as outlined , but care in the community is a hell of a lot better than locking people up in the likes of Portrane . Have you approached those that are caring for this unfortunate individual and told them of your situation?.

I don't want to identify people by naming hospitals but the head of psychiatry and a nurse visited the house at one stage when this tenant had a bad flare up. From what I was told she was refusing treatment. I don't want to see anybody locked up in an asylum, I thought that there was specialised housing these days where patients can be semi-independent.

Peregrinus

The world is full of people who are, depending on your point of view, eccentric, weird, disruptive or facing mental health challenges. They can't be admitted against their will, whether to a psychiatric hospital or to "specialised housing", simply because they create a noise niusance or because their behaviour annoys or worries you. The test for involuntary admission on mental health grounds is whether:

- the patient suffers from a mental illness, severe dementia or intellectual disability,

- and as a result there is serious likelihood that they may cause immediate and serious harm to themselves or others

- and their judgment is so impaired that their condition could get worse if they were not admitted to hospital for treatment that could only be given to them in hospital

- and going into hospital would be likely to improve their mental health significantly.

Unless the medics can tick all those boxes to the satisfaction of a judge, nobody will be involuntarily detained. You can't be detained on mental health grounds simply for having a personality disorder, or for being socially deviant, or for having a mental illness which is treatable outside hospital.

If there was a place in a supported accommodation facility she could of course be admitted on a voluntary basis, if she agreed, and if admission was judged to be for her benefit, and if - the big if - a place were available. The annoyance or distress that you experience would not be a factor in that assessment. There are a limited number of such places, and they mostly go to people who have a chronic severe mental illness or an intellectual disability or, commonly, both.

Seanachai

Peregrinus wrote: »

The world is full of people who are, depending on your point of view, eccentric, weird, disruptive or facing mental health challenges. They can't be admitted against their will, whether to a psychiatric hospital or to "specialised housing", simply because they create a noise niusance or because their behaviour annoys or worries you. The test for involuntary admission on mental health grounds is whether:

- the patient suffers from a mental illness, severe dementia or intellectual disability,

- and as a result there is serious likelihood that they may cause immediate and serious harm to themselves or others

- and their judgment is so impaired that their condition could get worse if they were not admitted to hospital for treatment that could only be given to them in hospital

- and going into hospital would be likely to improve their mental health significantly.

Unless the medics can tick all those boxes to the satisfaction of a judge, nobody will be involuntarily detained. You can't be detained on mental health grounds simply for having a personality disorder, or for being socially deviant, or for having a mental illness which is treatable outside hospital.

If there was a place in a supported accommodation facility she could of course be admitted on a voluntary basis, if she agreed, and if admission was judged to be for her benefit, and if - the big if - a place were available. The annoyance or distress that you experience would not be a factor in that assessment. There are a limited number of such places, and they mostly go to people who have a chronic severe mental illness or an intellectual disability or, commonly, both.

I understand what you've pointed out about the criteria, I would disagree with the description of such a noise disruption as being simply annoying or worrisome, it can be severely distressing and has a detrimental effect on my own mental health. The health of the person affected by the behaviour should also be taken into account.

Owryan

There is nothing stopping you raising a dispute with the landlord through the rtb if it is affecting you that much.

Peregrinus

Seanachai wrote: »

I understand what you've pointed out about the criteria, I would disagree with the description of such a noise disruption as being simply annoying or worrisome, it can be severely distressing and has a detrimental effect on my own mental health. The health of the person affected by the behaviour should also be taken into account.

It is taken into account. But the threshold for actally committing someone is that there is a "serious likelihood that they may cause immediate and serious harm to . . . others". Health effects short of that are not a basis for involuntary commital.