Section 117 Aftercare Explained: Free Mental Health Support Under the Mental Health Act

February 27, 2026

Witnessing a loved one losing the ability to fully comprehend the nature of their day-to-day management of affairs and suffering from mental illness can be a very distressing time. In the UK, there are safeguards in place ensuring the best possible care is given to patients who need it.

What is Section 117 Aftercare?

Where an individual has had to be admitted to a care setting or a hospital under section due to their challenging behaviours, they may be entitled to free aftercare normally paid by their local authority’s social services or the NHS.

These sectioned patients will require care after they have been discharged from hospital as they lack the mental capacity to make decisions on their own.

There is a requirement for health and social services to provide this aftercare to meet the needs of the patient’s mental disorder, prevent them from having to be readmitted to hospital and help to prevent their condition(s) from worsening.

If the patient is sectioned under certain sections of the Mental Health Act 1983 it is a requirement that their care is provided for free by social and local health services. This is not a discretionary decision – the law is clear.

Who qualifies for free aftercare?

Section 117 (3) applies to persons who are:

  • detained and admitted to hospital and;
  • ordinarily resident in England.

They will be entitled to the aftercare in the area where they were ordinarily resident or, in any other case, in the area where the person is discharged to after release from section.

How does Section 117 work?

The term ordinary resident refers to the place where the patient lives or his main home, which will determine which council will assess the patient’s needs and possibly fund the patient’s care.

Determining the local authority responsible for the aftercare service can become a litigious matter when discharged from hospital following compulsory detention for treatment of a mental disorder.

Case study example: R v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care

In the recent case of R (on the application of Worcestershire County Council) v Secretary of State for Health and Social Care [2023] UKSC 31; two local authorities, Worcestershire County Council and Swindon, were responsible for paying the aftercare services.

In the above case, the patient was ordinarily resident in Worcestershire when she was sectioned. Due to a lack of capacity to make a decision about where to reside after the section ended, the patient was placed in a different local authority area where she had to undergo treatment for a second time, this time in Swindon.

While residing in Swindon, the patient continued to receive s117 aftercare from Worcestershire’s local authority. A dispute arose between the two city councils as to which local authority should bear the costs for the patient’s aftercare.

This was referred to the Secretary of State, who found that the Worcestershire City Council was responsible, as the patient was an ordinary resident in their jurisdiction and that they arranged to have the patient placed in Swindon.

According to the Worcestershire City Council, the duty to provide care ended upon the patient’s second discharge when she moved to Swindon. The Secretary of State’s decision was appealed, and the Supreme Court found that the patient lacked the capacity to choose where to live and therefore on her first discharge the decision to live in Swindon was made in her best interests, voluntarily and for settlement purposes. And therefore, Swindon should bear the aftercare costs and not Worcestershire.

Conclusion

Hospitals will usually make decisions in the best interest of their mentally ill patients, considering the availability of care and where they will best be settled in. In the Worcestershire case, it has become clear that the responsibility for care will fall under the area where the patient was ordinarily resident at the time of discharge. This position might be revisited soon as the Draft Mental Health Bill 2022 contains different definitions and provisions, but this has not yet been enacted.

How can we help

If you would like to discuss the topics raised within this article, please contact us to speak to a member of our Private Wealth and Inheritance Team.

Graeme Black
Partner, Private Wealth & Inheritance
<script>
document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', function () {
  const deptEl = document.getElementById('acf-author-department');
  const department = deptEl?.dataset?.department;

  if (typeof gtag === 'function' && department) {
    gtag('set', { author_department: department });
  }
});


  window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || [];
  const dept = document.getElementById("author-department")?.textContent?.trim();
  if (dept) {
    window.dataLayer.push({
      event: "authorDataReady",
      author_department: dept
    });
  }

</script>
View profileContact Us

This reflects the law and market position at the date of publication and is written as a general guide. It does not contain definitive legal advice, which should be sought in relation to a specific matter.

Latest Legal Insights