Relatives of people with mental health problems, who also serve as their legal curators, feel the government should help them compile annual financial reports as requested by law.

We can’t fight the stigma when the legislation itself is using this jargon

“It’s a good thing that curators are being asked to be more accountable,” said Godfrey Borg, vice-president of the Mental Health Association.

“But curators, who are usually parents or relatives, don’t all know how to put together a financial report for the courts. They will have to incur expenses to get them done.”

Earlier this month, Justice Minister Chris Said announced legal amendments to make curators of people deemed incapable of looking after their own interests, more accountable.

They will now have to present an annual report to the courts, and every three years they will appear in court to be reappointed or removed from duty.

This is part of a series of amendments dealing with disability being made to three different laws to prepare for Malta’s ratification of the UN Convention for the Rights of People with Disabilities.

When told about the relatives’ concerns, a government spokesman said: “The report will consist of a simple form that will be filled with ease.”

The amendments have passed the committee stage and have reached the third reading.

Mr Borg said the government needed to back them up with support structures for curators. One example was providing an office where they could get help making the report for free.

He gave the example of a parent who had to file a court application to incapacitate his son – whose mental health problem caused him to act out and incur hefty debts. The court process costs money, so he suggested the government could provide services to reduce such costs.

A ministry spokesman said the new Guardianship Law in the pipeline would ensure guardians (instead of curators) would have all the necessary resources. Consultation with relevant stakeholders started last week in preparation for the law.

Mr Borg also criticised the language in some amendments as inconsistent and at times disrespectful. One part spoke about replacing the words “persons with unsound mind” or “in case of idiocy or other mental infirmity” to “persons with mental disability”. However, others retained words such as “insane” and “prodigal”.

“We can’t fight the stigma when the legislation itself is using this jargon,” Mr Borg said.

A government spokesman said: “The UN Convention inter-ministerial committee had identified occurrences of unacceptable terminology. All were changed and amended accordingly.”

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.