Mental Health Bill 2024: From the Seanad
Dail Éireann — 2026-04-29
============================================================

Sorca Clarke (SF), Longford-Westmeath

It is important that pharmacological restraint is mentioned here because if the State or any service intervenes in a way that limits a person's liberty, movement or bodily autonomy, the safeguards have to be exact. In addition, it has to be a genuine last resort, clinically justified, proportionate, time limited and independently scrutinised. I would like to see mandatory recording, clear notification procedures, oversight by the Mental Health Commission, and regular publication of anonymised data. People in crisis deserve care, compassion, and de-escalation first, and restrictive interventions must never become substitutes for proper treatment, staffing shortages, overcrowding or unsuitable settings.
I have a specific question that I would like an answer to. It relates to subsection (3) of amendment No. 345, which inserts a new section after section 91. It states:
Where the responsible consultant psychiatrist forms an opinion that it would be in the best interests of the child for any persons specified in subsection (1)(a) or (2)(a) not to be provided with information on the application of restrictive practices, such information is not required to be provided.
My understanding is that this means that a consultant psychiatrist may not be required to inform the parent when a restrictive practice has been used on his or her child. Could the Minister of State give an example of such a circumstance that may exist in the real world?

---

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/dail/2026-04-29/debate/main
Retrieved: 2026-09-21T01:01:08+00:00
Sitting date: 2026-04-29