Mental Health Bill 2024: Committee Stage (Resumed)
Seanad Éireann — 2026-01-22
============================================================

Mary Butler (FF), Waterford

In respect of amendments Nos. 149 and 150, which are similar, I cannot accept them for the simple fact that the Bill already provides for exactly what they seek to introduce. I will instead speak to amendments Nos. 298, 369 and 384.
When I came to this decision on Committee Stage in the Dáil, I found out when I looked for information that no young person had had ECT in Ireland in the last ten years. Not one. I am open to correction but I was told at the time that there was no CAMHS consultant in the country who was qualified to administer ECT. I could be wrong but that is what I was told at the time. However, I felt that it was really important that I state the following in this legislation to avoid any doubt.
I draw the attention of Senators to subsections (1) and (2) of section 52 of the Bill. Section 52(1) states that ECT cannot be administered except where a person has given his or her "consent in writing". This provision cannot be clearer. The Bill is massive and it is difficult to take in every section of it, but it states this very clearly. I acknowledge people's lived experience from many years ago. The Senators heard from people. People have talked to me as well. They speak about different treatments they had over many years. I accept that we have to listen to the lived experience of people, but it is crystal clear in the Bill that ECT cannot be administered except where a person has given his or her consent in writing.
Section 52(2) provides for circumstances where a person lacks capacity and is therefore unable to give consent or refuse treatment. Subsection (2) links with section 47, which states that a valid substitute decision-making arrangement, such as a court-appointed decision-making representative, or a valid relevant advance healthcare directive can consent on behalf of a person lacking capacity.
I do not believe the proposed amendments add anything further to these provisions. If Senators believe that they do, then I will listen, but I believe that strong protections must be in place regarding ECT. In addition to the fact that a person or a substitute decision-maker must consent to its administration, any administration of ECT must be done in accordance with regulations to be made by the Mental Health Commission.
Amendments Nos. 298, 369 and 384 all relate to the prohibition of the use of ECT on children and young people aged under 18. Following Committee Stage in the Dáil, I asked officials in my Department to prepare an amendment to prohibit the use of ECT on children and young people. I am very happy to move that here today. This prohibition has been supported by a number of stakeholders, including the Mental Health Commission.

---

Source: Houses of the Oireachtas. Licensed under CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). The Official Report is revised after first publication; the fetch timestamp below identifies the version quoted.

Record URI: https://data.oireachtas.ie/akn/ie/debateRecord/seanad/2026-01-22/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-08-14T04:54:32+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-01-22