scholarly journals A new appraisal of Mental Health Review Tribunals

1989 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 299-300 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. T. Grounds
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
Home Office ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Prime Function ◽  
Health Review

Mental Health Review Tribunals were introduced in the Mental Health Act (1959) to safeguard psychiatric patients against unjustified detention in hospital. The powers of tribunals form “an important part of the fabric of civil liberties” (Wood, 1974). However, in exercising their prime function of preventing unjust detention, tribunals in practice also have to take into account patients' clinical needs and the protection of the public. Further weight was added to this complex burden of decision making following a judgement by the European Court of Human Rights in 1981 which upheld the right of all detained patients to a periodic judicial review of their detention. As a result of this judgement the Mental Health Act (1983) extended tribunal powers to include the release of offender patients sentenced by Crown courts and given hospital orders with restrictions on discharge. Such individuals may have been convicted of grave criminal offences, and their discharge or transfer from hospital would otherwise require the consent of the Home Office.

Coercion in psychiatry: is it right to involuntarily treat inpatients with capacity?

2019 ◽  
Vol 45 (11) ◽  
pp. 742-745 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Hudson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Public Safety ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Psychiatric Inpatients ◽  
Involuntary Treatment ◽  
The Public ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Fusion Approach

Psychiatric inpatients with capacity may be treated paternalistically under the Mental Health Act 1983. This violates bodily autonomy and causes potentially significant harm to health and moral status, both of which may be long-lasting. I suggest that such harms may extend to killing moral persons through the impact of psychotropic drugs on psychological connectedness. Unsurprisingly, existing legislation is overwhelmingly disliked by psychiatric inpatients, the majority of whom have capacity. I present four arguments for involuntary treatment: individual safety, public safety, authentic wishes and protection of autonomy. I explore these through a case study: a patient with schizophrenia admitted to a psychiatric hospital under the Mental Health Act 1983 after an episode of self-poisoning. Through its discussion of preventative detention, the public safety argument articulates the (un)ethical underpinnings of the current position in English law. Ultimately, none of the four arguments are cogent—all fail to justify the current legal discrimination faced by psychiatric inpatients. I conclude against any use of involuntary treatment in psychiatric inpatients with capacity, endorsing the fusion approach where only psychiatric patients lacking capacity may be treated involuntarily.

scholarly journals What happens to patients discharged by Mental Health Review Tribunals?

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (6) ◽  
pp. 337-338 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip Wilkinson ◽  
Michael Sharpe
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Hospital ◽  
Psychiatric Hospitals ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
The Right ◽  
Special Hospitals ◽  
Treatment Order ◽  
Health Review

Under the Mental Health Act (1983) Mental Hospital Review Tribunals act as a safeguard against unwarranted detention of patients in psychiatric hospitals. Detention, other than in special hospitals, is most commonly under section 2 (assessment order) or section 3 (treatment order) of the 1983 Act. Patients thus detained have the right to appeal to a Review Tribunal, which has the power to order their discharge.

The Function of Mental Health Review Tribunals under the Mental Health Act 1983

1986 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 291-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Stephen Mawson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Periodic Review ◽  
British Government ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
European Court ◽  
Case Files ◽  
Exclusive Right ◽  
Special Hospitals ◽  
Health Review

In November 1981 the European Court of Human Rights declared that the continued detention of a person on the grounds of mental ill-health must be subject to periodic review by a court capable of ordering his discharge, even if the initial reason to commit issued from criminal proceedings. As a result, the British Government was compelled to remove the exclusive right of the Home Secretary to discharge restricted patients by extending this power to mental health review tribunals. The present study of the practice of such tribunals was made possible by the willingness of an experienced tribunal representative to open his case files to scrutiny, and attention was focussed on those cases active since the implementation of the Mental Health Act 1983. The study period, dating from October 1983 to May 1984, yielded 35 completed case files. As the source of the material came from a region containing two special hospitals, 28 (73.7 per cent) of the 35 tribunal hearings studied related to patients previously involved in criminal proceedings.

scholarly journals Rules, indications and documentation for applying physical coercion by emergency medical services

2015 ◽  
Vol 125 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-86
Author(s):  
Tomasz Kucmin ◽  
Adriana Kucmin ◽  
Małgorzata Płowaś-Goral ◽  
Adam Nogalski
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Medical Records ◽  
Emergency Services ◽  
Psychiatric Patients ◽  
Medical Emergency ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Legal Foundations ◽  
Apply Physical ◽  
The Right ◽  
Medical Emergency Services

Abstract Helping people with mental disorders poses a challenge to the members of medical emergency services (EMS). Psychiatric patients are often unpredictable and applying physical coercion is necessary in some cases. The aim of this paper was to present and comment on legal foundations of application of different forms of physical coercion by EMS members and describe how to fill out medical records required every time physical coercion was used. According to the amendments of Polish Mental Health Act made in 2010, the EMS members were granted the right to apply physical coercion. Further amendments to the Mental Health Act and the introduction of appropriate Ministry of Health decree define forms of physical coercion, indications to apply physical coercion and include a sample of proper medical records which are required in all cases of application of physical coercion. Application of physical coercion should always be treated as last-line treatment option while helping patients suffering from mental disturbances. Obeying the law every time a decision regarding physical coercion is made protects patients’ right to receive dignified care and treatment as well as the rights of medical professionals

scholarly journals The right to peaceful enjoyment of property and the security measure of the forfeiture of cash in the jurisprudence of the Serbian Constitutional Court: Certain uncertainty

Pravni zapisi ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 620-644
Author(s):  
Tamás Korhecz
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Public Interest ◽  
Cash Transfer ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Public ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Security Measure ◽  
European Court ◽  
The Right

The right to peaceful enjoyment of property is a first-generation human right, protected by the international and domestic law of the highest rank. This is not an absolute right - the European standards of protecting property rights allow possible interferences prescribed by law. The interferences can be made in the public interest but only under the assumption that the proportionality between the public interest and property rights of individuals at stake is established. Forfeiture of undeclared cash the individuals are transferring across state borders, together with imposing fines for a misdemeanor, represent an interference with individuals' property rights. The EU Member States do not share an identical system of sanctions for this petty offense, but there is a tendency of unification related to the monitoring, registering, and sanctioning of undeclared, cross-border, individual cash transfer. The case-law of the European Court of Human Rights has established rather precise criteria for distinguishing permitted from unpermitted interferences in cases of undeclared cross-border cash transfers. The Serbian Constitutional Court has been faced with several constitutional complaints regarding alleged unconstitutionally of the imposed security measure amounting to the forfeiture of undeclared cash physically transferred across the state borders. The Constitutional Court has ruled inconsistently on the matter. Although it has regularly referred to the European Court of Human Rights' relevant decisions, it fails to be consistent in following the Strasbourg Court's rulings. In this article, the author has suggested that the legal certainty principle requires the Constitutional Court to consistently interpret the constitutional rights and be systematic in following Strasbourg. Only in this way, the Constitutional Court can help regular courts effectively to harmonize the interpretation and application of laws with the constitutional and international human rights standards regarding property rights.

The Idea of Human Rights in Conditions of Hospital Treatment

2016 ◽  
pp. 1147-1165
Author(s):  
Bogusław Sygit ◽  
Damian Wąsik
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Civil Liberties ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Hospital Treatment ◽  
Political Rights ◽  
Human Rights Abuses ◽  
Cultural Rights ◽  
European Court ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
The Right

The aim of this chapter is describing of the influence of universal human rights and civil liberties on the formation of standards for hospital care. The authors present definition of the right to life and the right to health. Moreover in the section it is discussed modern standards of hospital treatment under the provisions of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: availability, accessibility, acceptability and quality. The authors discuss in detail about selected examples realization of human rights in the treatment of hospital and forms of their violation. During the presentation of these issues, the authors analyze a provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms and use a number of judgments of the European Court of Human Rights issued in matters concerning human rights abuses in the course of treatment and hospitalization.

The Electronic Surveillance of Public Assemblies

2011 ◽  
pp. 59-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haralambos Anthopoulos
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Data Protection ◽  
Electronic Surveillance ◽  
Combined Analysis ◽  
The Public ◽  
European Court ◽  
Political Views ◽  
Protection Legislation ◽  
The Right ◽  
Shed Light

The electronic surveillance of public assemblies has been an issue highly debated in the Greek public arena. The circumstances that brought this internationally contested topic in the public focus were the parliamentary introduction of Law 3625/2007 in Greece and the legislative enactment of an exemption from the data protection legislation for all police activities involving data processing during public assemblies. This paper will argue that the electronic surveillance of public assemblies affects both the privacy of political views (political privacy) and the activism (public anonymity) of a citizen. Along this line, the paper offers a combined analysis of the right to data protection [Art. 9A] and the right to free assembly [Art. 11] as acknowledged in the Greek Constitution (1975/86/01/08). As underlined, both rights constitute the basis for the protection of political privacy and public anonymity and preclude any legislatively posed limitations to their enjoyment. In the end, three key cases of the European Court of Human Rights shed light to the legitimacy of such a ‘panoptic’ surveillance of public assemblies.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Ian Cummins
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Prime Minister ◽  
Hostile Environment ◽  
Home Office ◽  
The Real ◽  
Senior Member ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Theresa May

When Theresa May became Prime Minister in July 2016, she made a speech on the steps of Downing Street in which she outlined a series of ‘burning injustices’ her administration would seek to tackle. Many were struck by the irony of this commitment to tackling inequality and disadvantages coming, as it did, from a senior member of the coalition and Conservative governments that since 2010 had introduced a series of policies which had targeted those living in poverty and the most vulnerable. The scandals of the revelation of the real impact of the ‘hostile environment’ created by May’s Home Office and the appalling treatment of the Windrush generation lay ahead. In May 2017, May announced that a review would be undertaken of the ‘flawed’ Mental Health Act (MHA). In making the announcement she stated:...

R (on the application of H) v London North and East Region Mental Health Review Tribunal [2001] EWCA Civ 415, Court of Appeal

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas E. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Public Law ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
East Region ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Human Rights Act 1998 ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Health Review

Essential Cases: Public Law provides a bridge between course textbooks and key case judgments. This case document summarizes the facts and decision in R (on the application of H) v London North and East Region Mental Health Review Tribunal [2001] EWCA Civ 415, Court of Appeal. This case concerned whether the language of ss 72–73 of the Mental Health Act 1983 could be read in such a way as to be compatible with the Human Rights Act 1998 (HRA), under s. 4 of that Act, or whether such an interpretation was not possible. In the latter case the court should consider making a declaration of incompatibility. This note explores s. 4 HRA declarations of incompatibility. The document also includes supporting commentary from author Thomas Webb

The law

2009 ◽  
pp. 459-498
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Compulsory Admission ◽  
Sexual Offences ◽  
Disability Discrimination ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Assessment And Treatment ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
Disability Discrimination Act ◽  
Health Review

Mental Health Act 1983 460 Mental Health Act 2007 462 Compulsory admission to hospital for assessment and treatment 464 Emergency holding powers 466 Mental Health Review Tribunals 468 The Mental Health Act Commission 470 Sexual Offences Act 472 Disability Discrimination Act 2005 474 Human Rights Act ...

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document