❓ A parliamentary question addresses the handling of a mental health patient's calls for help and subsequent suicide attempt, revealing systemic issues in call management and risk assessment within mental health services. The response highlights gaps in tracking calls and inconsistencies in emergency response protocols.
AnsweredQoN 2843Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
I refer to the case of a male mental health patient with depression and borderline personality disorder who has made several recent suicide attempts, and ask:
(a) why did three phone calls made by the patient on Monday, 19 April 2010 to Sir Charles Gardiner Hospital, in which he asked to be put through to the Psychiatry Department, drop out without being answered;
(b) why, when he called Royal Perth Hospital and asked for psychiatry, was he instead put through to the Mental Health Emergency Response Line (MHERL);
(c) why did his call to MHERL go unanswered, leaving him with a recorded message via which he left his contact details;
(d) how many other calls to MHERL go unanswered;
(e) is the Minister aware that after this particular patient’s calls and cries for help went unanswered he overdosed on painkillers in a deliberate attempt to commit suicide;
(f) was the patient visited by a Local Area Mental Health or Community Emergency Response Mental Health Team on Monday, 19 April 2010;
(g) exactly when did the MHERL team call him back, or have a Community Emergency Mental Health member visit him;
(h) is it true that, even after this suicide attempt, this patient is still at home; and
(i) has a recent suicide risk assessment been undertaken of this patient?
(a) why did three phone calls made by the patient on Monday, 19 April 2010 to Sir Charles Gardiner Hospital, in which he asked to be put through to the Psychiatry Department, drop out without being answered;
(b) why, when he called Royal Perth Hospital and asked for psychiatry, was he instead put through to the Mental Health Emergency Response Line (MHERL);
(c) why did his call to MHERL go unanswered, leaving him with a recorded message via which he left his contact details;
(d) how many other calls to MHERL go unanswered;
(e) is the Minister aware that after this particular patient’s calls and cries for help went unanswered he overdosed on painkillers in a deliberate attempt to commit suicide;
(f) was the patient visited by a Local Area Mental Health or Community Emergency Response Mental Health Team on Monday, 19 April 2010;
(g) exactly when did the MHERL team call him back, or have a Community Emergency Mental Health member visit him;
(h) is it true that, even after this suicide attempt, this patient is still at home; and
(i) has a recent suicide risk assessment been undertaken of this patient?
AnswerView source ↗
Answered
15 June 2010
Responded by
Minister for Mental Health
Response time
42 days
(a) The Sir Charles Gardiner Hospital Department of Psychiatry does not have a telephone phone call tracking/recording system in order to review what occurred for the specific telephone call from this patient. It is therefore not possible to determine the technical outcome of any alleged call.
(b) Calls to other agencies, including hospitals, are sometimes diverted to the Mental Health Emergency Response Line (MHERL) as this allows people to talk directly with an experienced mental health clinician.
(c) If clinicians are on other calls, then callers are asked if they want to leave a message or remain on the line. All messages left with MHERL are responded to.
(d) Calls to MHERL do not go unanswered. If clinicians are on other calls, then callers are asked if they want to leave a message or remain on the line.
(e) No. Records indicate nil expression of self harm ideation on the evening in question, with a documented past history of responding well to supportive counselling.
(f) No
(g) MHERL initiated referral to Osborne Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) at 15:20 hrs on 24 April 2010 and Osborne CERT visited the patient at his home at 16:05 hrs on 24 April 2010.
(h) After the home assessment by the CERT on the 24 April 2010, the plan was to provide a structure to the patient's day and long weekend, to access MHERL for telephone support and to make an appointment with his General Practitioner to explore the suitability and viability of an inpatient referral to Hollywood Private Clinic as per request by the patient.
(i) As part of the home assessment process conducted by the CERT on 24 April 2010, the attending clinicians reported that there were no thoughts to harm either himself or others. Therefore an in-depth suicide risk assessment was not conducted.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
(b) Calls to other agencies, including hospitals, are sometimes diverted to the Mental Health Emergency Response Line (MHERL) as this allows people to talk directly with an experienced mental health clinician.
(c) If clinicians are on other calls, then callers are asked if they want to leave a message or remain on the line. All messages left with MHERL are responded to.
(d) Calls to MHERL do not go unanswered. If clinicians are on other calls, then callers are asked if they want to leave a message or remain on the line.
(e) No. Records indicate nil expression of self harm ideation on the evening in question, with a documented past history of responding well to supportive counselling.
(f) No
(g) MHERL initiated referral to Osborne Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) at 15:20 hrs on 24 April 2010 and Osborne CERT visited the patient at his home at 16:05 hrs on 24 April 2010.
(h) After the home assessment by the CERT on the 24 April 2010, the plan was to provide a structure to the patient's day and long weekend, to access MHERL for telephone support and to make an appointment with his General Practitioner to explore the suitability and viability of an inpatient referral to Hollywood Private Clinic as per request by the patient.
(i) As part of the home assessment process conducted by the CERT on 24 April 2010, the attending clinicians reported that there were no thoughts to harm either himself or others. Therefore an in-depth suicide risk assessment was not conducted.
Notice: This document is created or edited using unregistered or evaluation copy of rtLib valid for testing or development purposes only. To use it for productive or any other purposes please register it. You may purchase the license on
http://www.rtlib.com
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.