Page 1237 - 10. 2nd half 2018 New 26-05-21 No Table

8) He was however detained subject to Section 2 in August 2016 and was subsequently
discharged by a Tribunal.
Reply:

9) The history indicated that he was discharged on prescribed medication and followed up
by EIS.
Reply:

10) He reportedly did not engage with services or medication and was thereafter
discharged from EIS.
Reply:

11) He has a current working diagnosis of schizophrenia.
Reply:

12) The current admission follows an incident in October 2018 which led to safeguarding
concerns and the Enfield Adult North Locality Team's decision to arrange an MHA
assessment.
Mr. Cordell was detained subject to Section 2 on the
02 .11.2018.
Reply:

4 2. The Responsible Authority’s case:
The clinical case argued that the patient has a chronic and enduring mental
illness. It is unclear whether the mental disorder responds to treatment as the
patient has not engaged consistently with treatment. Currently, the patient has
been assessed without medication as Mr. Cordell does not accept that he
requires psychotropic medication. Mr. Cordell presents with a number of
persecutory, paranoid thoughts in relation to his beliefs that the police and his
neighbours are in some way targeting him. Mr. Cordell also exhibits thought
disorder and some tangentiality in his response to questions posed. The
professional evidence argued that the nature and degree of the mental disorder
warranted the patient's continued detention of assessment which is justified in
the interests of the patient's health, safety and the protection of others.

1) The clinical case argued that the patient has a chronic and enduring mental illness.
Reply:

2) It is unclear whether the mental disorder responds to treatment as the patient has not
engaged consistently with treatment.
Reply:

3) Currently, the patient has been assessed without medication as Mr. Cordell does not
accept that he requires psychotropic medication.
Reply: