In its past three Annual Reports, the CVP has commented on Police transport of consumers to hospital. A consumer transported in a police vehicle is almost always transported in the cage of the vehicle. Sometimes this may be necessary to protect the safety of all involved, however if alternative, safe transport to hospital is possible, the CVP sees transport in the cage of a police vehicle as a breach of a person’s right to be treated with dignity.

The CVP has argued that use of Police for transport appeared to be routine practice throughout the Territory, accepted as the norm by all players; staff, Police and consumers and carers.

The CVP has received many complaints from consumers transported to hospital this way. A few such complaints are detailed below:

• A consumer complained to the CVP that he had been transported to hospital in the cage of a police vehicle. When queried about the inappropriateness of transporting the consumer this way, the Psychiatric Registrar said he was not exactly sure who had organised it but that he thought it was the mental health service’s protocol. He said that someone at risk of suicide could not be transported in a car. 
• A service provider contacted mental health staff concerned about the wellbeing of a consumer who had recently been discharged from hospital. There were no apparent safety issues, yet the service provider was counselled to contact Police. A few days later, when they had assessed the consumer as requiring further involuntary admission, mental health staff transported the consumer to hospital.
• A case manager arranged to transport a consumer to hospital, however the consumer’s family had already contacted Police. The case manager stated that when the consumer knew she was to be transported by Police, she resisted, saying over and over "Not in the cage".
• The mental health of an elderly consumer with a number of serious physical health issues (so much so that he could not walk ten metres without support) deteriorated, and a family member brought him to the Emergency Department for assessment. The consumer left the Emergency Department before he was admitted to the psychiatric inpatient unit. Police were contacted, and he was transported back to the ward in the cage of the police vehicle.
  The CVP has received and investigated a number of similar complaints. Complaints have also been received from consumers who could not be transported safely to hospital by any means other than Police, and the Police role in managing these situations is acknowledged.

This issue was referred to the Darwin community visitors panel for investigation during their visit to the TEMHS Inpatient Unit in November 2007. As part of their report to the Principal Community Visitor, the panel wrote a letter requesting that the Principal Community Visitor write to the CEO of the Department of Health and Families and the Commissioner of Police requesting that action be taken to ensure that consumers were no longer routinely transported to hospital by Police.

The CVP is aware that these complaints and CVP follow up is all happening at the same time as the development of National Principles for Safe Transport of consumers to hospital and the review and development of a Memorandum of Understanding between NT Mental Health Services and NT Police. There appears to be a commitment to a change in practice and the CVP looks forward to increased use of Ambulance and better coordination between mental health, police and ambulance services to ensure safe and respectful transport to hospital.