Allegations of Abuse
in Institutions |
|
|
|
A former psychiatric patient looks
set to get her day in court - 50 years after she says she was mistreated at The woman, whose name is suppressed,
will be the first of more than 200 former patients to have a full hearing of
their case. She is due in the High Court at In the meantime, some of the
plaintiffs, and witnesses, are so old or sick that they could die before
their claims are heard, Justice Warwick Gendall was told in the High Court
yesterday. The Crown says some of its
potential witnesses, now in their 80s or 90s, might also die before the
hearings. Already the evidence of a former
nurse has been taken and Justice Gendall gave permission yesterday for the
evidence of another woman to be taken before October's hearing formally
begins. This former patient has a social
phobia and will not leave her home so the lawyers and judge will either have
to go to her or have a video link set up between her home and the court. Yesterday the Crown had asked
Justice Gendall to strike out the whole of the first woman's case, which he
refused, but he did refine her claim. Crown lawyer Hamish Hancock had
criticised the legal and factual basis of the claims. He said the Crown could
not respond to many of them because the woman could not name the staff
members - and some fellow patients - she accused of abuse, or say when it
happened. The woman's lawyer, Sonja Cooper,
said the woman was doing her best to give details of her claims but
electroconvulsive therapy used on her repeatedly had affected her memory. She was elderly, damaged and
somewhat fragile, and trying to remember events 50 years ago. Justice Gendall accepted it was
difficult for both sides. "Of course it's difficult. I
can't remember last month, let alone 50 years ago," he said. One of the legal hurdles the woman
faces is that psychiatric hospital staff were immune from civil claims for
acts done, or intended to be done, in the course of treating patients. Many former patients say they were
put in solitary confinement, given electroconvulsive shock treatment, and
prescription medicines, as punishment. One area of dispute is whether
some actions the staff took were truly treatment. A judge has ruled that the woman
whose case begins in October was not able, through disability or inability to
formulate the grounds of her claim, to have brought proceedings before 1998.
|