Draft Mental Health, Capacity and Self-Determination (Jersey) Amendment Law 202-. (P.42/2026) – Children’s Rights Impact Assessment
This content has been automatically generated from the original PDF and some formatting may have been lost, therefore it should not be relied upon to extract citations or propose amendments. Please see the PDF for the official version of the document.
STATES OF JERSEY
DRAFT MENTAL HEALTH, CAPACITY AND SELF-DETERMINATION (JERSEY) AMENDMENT LAW 202- (P.42/2026) – CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
Presented to the States on 10th February 2026 by the Minister for Health and Social Services
STATES GREFFE
2026 P.42 Add.
CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IMPACT ASSESSMENT (CRIA)
PART 1: SCREENING
Name and title of Duty Bearer: Minister for Health and Social Services Type of Duty Bearer:
(Minister, Elected Member or States Minister
Assembly Body)
Assessment completed by (if not
Policy Officer
completed by duty bearer):
Date: 29/10/2025
1) Name and brief description of the proposed decision Decision' means: • an Assembly proposition • an amendment (or further amendment) to a proposition • for Ministerial duty-bearers, policy under development |
The draft Mental Health, Capacity and Self-Determination (Jersey) Amendment Law 202- will, if approved, make a number of amendments to both the Mental Health (Jersey) Law 2016 ("the Mental Health Law") and the Capacity and Self- Determination (Jersey) Law 2016 ("the Capacity Law") following a review of both laws. The amendments made by the draft Law form a first tranche of amendments to both Laws, a further second set of amendments are currently being developed in conjunction with stakeholders. The reasons for the amendments vary, some are required due to errors in the enacted Laws whilst others are required due to changing best practice. A number are also required due to the provisions in Law being informed by English provisions. However, as a small island, our requirements and services are unique, and opportunities have emerged to update provisions to better suit services in Jersey and better protect patients and the public from potential harm. The draft Law is generally supportive of children's rights. It strengthens the current legislation by providing clearer or corrected provisions, better oversight and enables enhanced multidisciplinary practice. Key benefits relate to more timely protection in crises, enabling multidisciplinary clinical leadership and clearer signposting to existing routes for review and redress. Risks arise through expanded professionals who can authorise emergency detentions. However, these risks can be mitigated by the design of new or continued application of child-specific safeguards and training. |
2) Which groups of children and young people are likely to be affected? Groups of children could include early years, primary or secondary education; young adults; children with additional learning needs; disabled children; children living in poverty; children from particular ethnic backgrounds; migrants; refugees; care experienced children and LGBTQ+ children |
Any children who are subject to the provisions of the Mental Health Law and any children over the age of 16 who are subject to provisions of the Capacity Law. |
3) What is the likely impact of the proposed decision on children and on their rights? Impacts may be positive or negative, direct or indirect |
Include whether different groups of children will be affected differently by the decision |
The amendments to the two Laws will positively impact children and young people by improving or correcting certain provisions within the Mental Health Law and the Capacity Law. Mental Health Law Amendments Amendments to Article 15 of the Mental Health Law will broaden which doctors are able to authorise an emergency admission. In practice the current limitations regarding who can authorise an emergency admission has given rise to difficulties in securing an appropriately qualified practitioner to authorise an emergency admission which has resulted in an increased risk to vulnerable patients. The use of such a power is necessary where a patient is suffering an acute episode of mental distress and is saying they wish to leave hospital premises to end their life, or who is suffering auditory command hallucinations instructing them to hurt others, which they may act upon if they leave hospital premises. The amendment enables timelier protection of children in acute mental health crises and reduces the risk of children leaving safe environments when no Approved Clinician is immediately available. The introduction of Approved Clinicians (ACs) status into the Mental Health Law will enable formal roles under the Law in relation to detained patients to be carried out by a wider range of mental health professionals than at present. This enables multidisciplinary, patient-centred care by allowing patients to be treated by senior clinicians whose professional background may be especially relevant to a particular presentation. The proposed amendment will reflect arrangements which have been in place in England & Wales since 2008, will enable the implementation of a modern workforce configuration which, in turn, will enable Jersey's mental health services to recognise and make full use of skills and experience acquired by clinicians in England & Wales or other parts of the UK. It is important to note that clinicians will still need to be approved by the Minister to obtain AC status in Jersey and that the training and experience requirements for the additional types of mental health professionals will be prescribed by Order before the draft Law comes into force. The amendment made to Article 22(4) corrects the current omission within the criteria that governs the renewal of a treatment authorisation, to add the ground that the patient continues to be suffering from mental disorder of a nature or degree which warrants detention for treatment. The absence of the requirement that the patient (continues to) be suffering from a mental disorder of a nature or degree which warrants detention for treatment, within the criteria is notable. Additionally, Article 52(1) – which sets out the test which the Mental Health Review Tribunal must apply when considering any application from a patient concerning detention – does include such a requirement. Removing the omission places beyond doubt the correct criteria that must be met for a renewal of a treatment authorisation to be authorised under the Mental Health Law. Amendments to Article 41 would allow for Second Opinion Approved Doctors to certify capacity-based consent where it is appropriate in addition to the current list of mental health professionals, supporting more responsive arrangements for |
certification. The existing legal safeguards remain present in Law. In practice, any assessments and subsequent certifications of this nature must remain age-appropriate and fully documented. Amendments to Articles 82 and 83 clarifies the criteria that sets out when restrictions can be imposed on electronic media, communications and postal correspondence. The amendments to both Articles also clarify who must be provided, in writing, with notice of a restriction and who has a right to a review of the restriction under Article 84. These amendments clarify the criteria for imposing restrictions which helps strengthen safeguards regarding their misuse. It is acknowledged that restricting communication of any sort can significantly affect children's emotional wellbeing and the Article 9 right to maintain family contact. It is therefore important that any restriction continues to be exceptional, time limited and subject to independent review. Mitigations include that it remains normal practice for any restrictions be explained to the child in an age-appropriate way and a continued (but more clearly set out) right of appeal via the Mental Health Review Tribunal. Amendments to the Schedule supports making Mental Health Review Tribunal application information clearer and setting out clearly who can challenge restrictions on behalf of a child. This clarity ensures children and their nearest relative or person have the ability to challenge decisions affecting a child's liberty or communication. Capacity Law Amendments Amendments to Article 9 corrects the current definition of restraint so that the definition is met if either subparagraph (a) or (b) of Article 9(1) is met. This reflects the original policy intention. In practice, the effect of the current wording means that the definition of restraint' requires both limbs of Article 9(2) to be met for restraint to be established. As a result, measures which limit a person's liberty of movement, but do not involve the use or threat of force, do not constitute restraint. Such measures include, for example, the administration of sedative or psychotropic medication (sometimes called chemical restraint'), or the use of bedrails. These measures are, by their nature, forms of restraint, but do not currently fall within the definition. Correcting the definition of restraint protects those subject to restrictions of liberty from covert or unmonitored restrictions being put in place as these restrictions would be clearly unlawful if not approved. The transitional provisions contained within the draft Law prevent the abrupt ceasing of authorisations of existing appropriate restrictions for all persons and ensures that the continuity of current care is maintained. Amendments to Article 34 clarify that instead of resignation of a delegate being perceived to be immediate, the Court must consider the resignation and decide on an appropriate course of action that takes into account the best interests of the person. This amendment will ensure greater stability in legal decision-making for children who rely on delegates and reduces the risk of gaps in decision making that could jeopardise the welfare of a child with an appointed delegate. |
4) Is a full Children's Rights Impact Assessment required? If you have identified impacts on children and their rights, a full CRIA should be completed. If no impacts are identified then a Full CRIA is not required, but please explain your rationale and how you reached this conclusion |
|
Yes
If screening determines that a full CRIA is needed, complete Part 2
Part 2: FULL CHILDREN'S RIGHTS IMPACT ASSESSMENT
5) What will be the impacts (positive or negative) of the proposed decision on children's rights?
For each of the UNCRC articles described below, click to identify any that may be relevant ☒
Category UNCRC Article Impact? YES NO
Non-discrimination (Art 2) ☐ ☐ Best interests of the Child (Art 3) to be a top priority X ☐
Guiding
Principles Right to Life survival and development (Art 6) X ☐ Respect for the child's views (Art 12) ☐ ☐
Right to birth registration, name and nationality (Art 7) ☐ ☐ Right to an identity (Art 8) ☐ ☐ Freedom of expression (Art 13) ☐ ☐
Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (Art 14)
Every child has the right to think and believe what they ☐ ☐ choose
C&i Frvilee Rdoighmts s Freedom of association (Art 15)
Every child has the right to meet with other children and ☐ ☐ to join groups and organisations
Right to Privacy (Art 16) including family and home life ☐ ☐ Access to information from the media (Art 17)
Right to access reliable information from a variety of X ☐ sources, in a format that children can understand
Protinhuemctaneion tagareatimnsentt to orrtur pe uniorshm otherentcr(uAelrt, d 37(egra)adi) ng or ☐ ☐ Family Respect for the responsibilities, rights and duties of
Environment parents (or where applicable, extended family or ☐ ☐ and community) to guide their child as they grow up (Art 5)
ACarlteer native Rdeveesponslopmibenilitt ofies tofhe boir chith pld ar(entArts 18in )t he upbringing and ☐ ☐
| Children must not be separated from their parents against their will unless it is in their best interests (Art 9) | X | ☐ |
Family reunification (Art 10) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Abduction and non-return of children abroad (Art 11) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Right to a standard of living that is good enough to meet the child's physical and social needs and support their development (Art 27) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Special protection for children unable to live with their family (Art 20) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Best interests of the child in the context of Adoption (Art 21) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Review of treatment whilst in care (Art 25) If a child has been placed away from home for the purpose of care or protection (for example, with a foster family or in hospital), they have the right to a regular review of their treatment, the way they are cared for and their wider circumstances. | X | ☐ | |
Protection from violence, abuse or neglect (Art 19) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Recovery from trauma and reintegration (Art 39) Children who have experienced neglect, abuse, exploitation, torture or who are victims of war must receive special support to help them recover their health, dignity, self-respect and social life. | ☐ | ☐ | |
Basic Health and Welfare | Rights of disabled children (Art 23) | ☐ | ☐ |
Right to health and health services (Art 24) | X | ☐ | |
Right to social security (Art 26) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Right to adequate standard of living (Art 27) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Education, Leisure and Cultural Activities | Right to education (Art 28) | ☐ | ☐ |
Goals of education (Art 29) Education must develop every child's personality, talents and abilities to the full | ☐ | ☐ | |
Leisure, play and culture (Art 31) Every child has the right to relax, play and take part in cultural and artistic activities | ☐ | ☐ | |
Special Protection Measures | Special protection for refugee children (Art 22) | ☐ | ☐ |
Children and armed conflict (Art 38 and Optional Protocol #1) | ☐ | ☐ |
| Governments must do everything they can to protect and care for children affected by war and armed conflict. |
|
|
Children and juvenile justice (Art 40) Right to be treated with dignity and respect, right to legal assistance and a fair trial that takes account of age. | ☐ | ☐ | |
Inhumane treatment and detention (Art 37 (b)-(d)) Children should be arrested, detained or imprisoned only as a last resort and for the shortest time possible. | ☐ | ☐ | |
Recovery from trauma and reintegration (Art 39) Children who have experienced neglect, abuse, exploitation, torture or who are victims of war must receive special support to help them recover their health, dignity, self-respect and social life | ☐ | ☐ | |
Child labour and right to be protected from economic exploitation (Art 32) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Drug abuse (Art 33) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Sexual exploitation (Art 34) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Abduction, sale and trafficking of children (Art 35) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Protection from other forms of exploitation including for political activities, by the media or for medical research (Art 36) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Children belonging to a minority or an indigenous group (Art 30) | ☐ | ☐ | |
Optional Protocol on the sale of children, child prostitution and child pornography | ☐ | ☐ | |
Optional protocol on the involvement of children in armed conflict | ☐ | ☐ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6) Information and research What evidence has been used to inform your assessment? | ||
Evidence collected (include links to relevant publications) | What did the evidence tell you? | What are the data gaps, if any? |
Operational evidence and data from within Mental Health Services | There are current issues with availability of Approved Practitioners out of hours, small island workforce constraints, and practical difficulties in applying current restraint and SRoL provisions. |
|
7) Engagement with children What groups of children and young people (or those who speak on their behalf, such as social workers, teachers or youth workers) have been directly or indirectly involved in developing the decision? | ||
Groups consulted | How they were involved | What were the findings? |
None | N/A | N/A |
8) Assessing Impact on children's rights Based on the information collected and analysed above, what likely impact will the proposed decision have on the specific children's rights identified in question 5)? | ||
Relevant UNCRC Articles (rights) identified in Q5 | Describe the positive or negative impacts on these rights | Which group(s) of children are likely to be affected? |
Article 3 the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration. | The Law aims to positively impact children's Article 3 rights by improving existing provisions contained within the Mental Health and Capacity Laws. These improvements include correcting and clarifying elements of the law to ensure the best interests of any child subject to the provisions of the law remain of primary consideration. This includes: An amendment to enable more timely emergency admissions by broadening the criteria that governs which appropriately trained doctors can authorise such admissions. An amendment to provisions that set out where access to electronic media or communications and postal items may be restricted to clarify the existing criteria, processes and scope of | All children subject to provisions of either the mental health law or the capacity law. |
| the Mental Health Review Tribunal in terms of a review of those restrictions. An amendment to correct the definition of restraint so that any restraint assessed as necessary and in the best interests of a patient by an appointed Capacity and Liberty Assessor can be authorised as such under the Law. At the heart of the assessment and imposition of any Significant Restriction of Liberty is that it must be necessary and in the best interests of the person lacking capacity. An amendment to clarify that a delegate may resign, but before that resignation can take effect, the court must consider the resignation and decide an appropriate course of action that is in the best interests of the person lacking capacity. |
|
Article 6 right to life, survival, and development | Amendments to Article 15 of the Mental Health Law enables the timelier protection of children experiencing acute mental health crises by expanding which doctors (to staff grade and above) can authorise an emergency admission where no senior mental health doctor is available. It is hoped that should the situation arise, the serious risk to a child leaving a safe environment as a result of an acute mental health crisis can be better prevented than currently. | All children subject to provisions of either the mental health law or the capacity law. |
Article 12 Right to be heard | Whilst the draft Law does not amend any applications that can be made to the tribunal it does provide clarity and set out the rights of review in a more accessible way. This supports a child's Article 12 rights by improving Tribunal access and communicates rights to review to children and those supporting them more clearly. | All children subject to provisions of either the mental health law or the capacity law. |
Article 19 Protection from harm | The draft law expands who can authorise an emergency provision to better protect people who are experiencing an acute mental health crisis from harm. The draft law also corrects the definition of restraint to provide revised oversight of what restraint constitutes a significant restriction of liberty and reinforces the safeguards against potential over-use of or inconsistent use of restrictive measures. | All children subject to provisions of either the mental health law or the capacity law. |
Article 24 highest attainable standard of health | Improved/clarified provisions of both laws promote access to healthcare services, multidisciplinary treatment pathways and lawful interventions as the policy originally intended. These amendments help to contribute towards the achievement of the highest attainable standard of health for children in Jersey. | All children subject to provisions of either the mental health law or the capacity law. |
9) Weighing positive and negative impacts • If a negative impact is identified for any area of rights or any group of children and young people, what options are there to modify the proposed decision to mitigate the impact? • Could any positive impacts be enhanced? |
Article 15 – Any provision that results in the detention of a child for any period of time for whatever reason must be carefully considered. The benefits of broadening who can authorise an emergency admission outweigh the negative impacts. However, these negative impacts can be mitigated by the implementation of child specific training for any staff potentially using emergency admission powers including requirement of prompt CAMHS involvement and rapid post-event reviews. The Code of Practice for the Mental Health Law will also be updated to describe and reflect the changes made to Article 15. Further work, under the next phase of work will consider the development of specific provisions of the Mental Health Law that would apply to children, it is envisaged that positive impacts of the existing Law could be further enhanced by any child focused provisions. |
10) Conclusions In summary, what are your key findings on the impact of the proposed decision on the rights of Jersey children? |
The amendments set out in the draft Law collectively strengthen the legislative framework governing the mental health care and liberty protections of children in Jersey. By improving clarity, enhancing multidisciplinary clinical roles, and establishing more proportionate and child sensitive processes across mental health and capacity legislation, the reforms advance UNCRC principles, including the best interests of the child, the right to health, and the right to be heard. The package also addresses several operational challenges identified since the original laws came into force, helping ensure that children experiencing mental distress can access timely, safe care within a modernised system. Nonetheless, the amendments introduce areas where children's rights could be adversely affected if not implemented with careparticularly around the expanded professionals who can authorise emergency restriction powers. This CRIA identifies these risks to the rights of children under amendments made to Article 15. To maximise the benefits and minimise the risks the described mitigations will be implemented as part of the work to prepare for the enactment of the draft Law. |