Waiting times for people in mental health crisis are ‘unacceptably long’.

That is among the findings from Tynwald’s policy review committee investigation into issues surrounding suicide, contributory factors and prevention.

People at imminent risk of self-harm or suicide may be referred, or self-refer, to the Crisis Response and Home Treatment Team (CRHTT), which makes an assessment and can offer ‘either intensive home support’ or a referral to the mental health service offering an intervention, which can include therapy up to ‘acute inpatient admission’.

But the average waiting time for treatment, following referral by the crisis team to the community mental health service, is four weeks.

Chaired by David Cretney MLC, the committee says: ‘The time taken for service users who experience crises to receive care following referral by the CRHTT is unacceptably long.’

Waiting lists for other parts of the mental health service are ‘unacceptable’.

‘Quick access to counselling and cognitive behavioural therapy might prevent a deeply unhappy or distressed person from escalating their problem and requiring more specialist services or crisis intervention,’ the report says.

‘Under the mental health service’s stepped care model, in addition pharmaceutical treatments, a range of psychological interventions are available to people suffering from mental disorders.

‘However, due to high demand, several of the key interventions have extensive waiting lists.’

Waiting times for treatment from the community health service can reach 15 months, while the community wellbeing service has a 10-month wait for counselling and seven months for cognitive behaviour therapy. There are no waiting lists for guided self-help, occupational therapy or art therapy.

Tynwald will be called on to reaffirm previous commitments, made after a report into mental health provision, including extra support for carers and yearly reports on the progress on waiting times in all service areas.

The report – which is laid before next week’s sitting of Tynwald but not yet scheduled for debate – reaches a number of other conclusions and recommendations, including:

•It welcomes the public health directorate taking a more central role in suicide prevention and recommends information is included in the director’s annual reports to Tynwald,

•Health and social care providers and other ‘gatekeepers’ – whose roles put them in a position where they can identify ‘suicidal ideation’ – should be encouraged to routinely inquire with vulnerable service users about the formation of such thoughts.

•Clinicians should be encouraged to ‘explore’ service users’ internet use, as part of prevention.

•Applied suicide intervention skills training’ be encouraged for ‘gatekeepers and other interested individuals’.

Tynwald will be asked to state that psychological support should be introduced for patients experiencing ‘moderate to severe emotional reactions to illnesses’.

•The government should review methods of restricting ‘mentally disordered persons’ from holding firearms licences.

•The public health directorate should commission a ‘suicide audit’ to identify areas of prevention.

•Police and the courts should ‘continue to improve the support they give to people affected by suicide’.

Tynwald will be called on to state there is ‘a need for additional support for those bereaved by suicide’, including extra training and a ‘focal point for the co-ordination of the response to a suicide and a survivors’ group’.