Compulsory Treatment in the Community: Is it Authorized under the Mental Health Act 1983?

1984 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 148-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Rohde
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act

Compulsory Treatment for Anorexia Nervosa: Compassion or Coercion?

1993 ◽  
Vol 162 (5) ◽  
pp. 679-680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Tiller ◽  
Ulrike Schmidt ◽  
Janet Treasure
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Anorexia Nervosa ◽  
Clinical Experience ◽  
Media Coverage ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
The Media ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
Legal Opinion

Compulsory treatment for anorexia nervosa was recently once again a topic for discussion following the case of J, a 16-year-old girl who unsuccessfully applied to the Court of Appeal to refuse treatment for her anorexia nervosa. In this instance legal opinion was sought in order to clarify the Children Act 1989. However, much of the media coverage focused on the controversy surrounding the compulsory treatment of anorexia nervosa, under the provisions of the Mental Health Act 1983. There is a lack of research into the compulsory treatment of anorexia nervosa, so debate has to be informed by clinical experience.

scholarly journals Paternalism or Power? – Compulsory treatment under section 58 of the Mental Health Act 1983

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (14) ◽  
pp. 90
Author(s):  
Paul Hope
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Court Of Appeal

<strong><strong><em></em></strong></strong><p align="LEFT">R (on the application of B) v S and others</p><p align="LEFT">Court of Appeal; Lord Phillips CJ, Thorpe LJ and Rix LJ; 26 January 2006</p><p>[2006] EWCA Civ 28</p>

scholarly journals Compulsory Treatment in the Community: Is it Authorized under the Mental Health Act 1983?

1984 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 148-151 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Rohde
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Recent Article ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Seriously Ill Patients ◽  
Seriously Ill

The Mental Health Act 1983 stimulated discussion on all aspects of compulsion in psychiatry. It has been the practice at St. Mary Abbots Hospital to use the powers granted by Section 39 of the 1959 Act and Section 17 of the 1983 Act as a means of compelling a small number of seriously ill patients to take medicines in the community, and I described this practice briefly in a recent article.

scholarly journals Compulsory treatment in the community: current legal powers

2002 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 180-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Steffan Davies
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Northern Ireland ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Health Legislation

Reform of mental health legislation has been under consideration for several years in England and Wales (Department of Health, 2000a), where the Mental Health Act 1983 is in force, and in Scotland (Millan Committee Secretariat, 2001), which is governed by the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. The Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 is also under review, although the findings have yet to be published.

scholarly journals Mental health law in Denmark

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 88-90 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mette Brandt-Christensen
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Hospitals ◽  
Legal Rights ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Compulsory Admission ◽  
Trial Period ◽  
Mental Health Law ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Definition Of

In Denmark, the parliament passed the first Mental Health Act (MHA) in 1938. A new Act was passed in 1989, based on a thorough report from the Ministry of Justice. The 1989 Act emphasised the protection of citizens' legal rights in relation to compulsory admission, detention and treatment in psychiatric hospitals. That Act is still in operation, although it has been amended several times. In 2006 the definition of ‘compulsion’ was changed, and a 2010 amendment introduced compulsory treatment in the community for a trial period of 4 years.

scholarly journals Capacity, Treatment and Human Rights

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (10) ◽  
pp. 52
Author(s):  
Peter Bartlett
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Anti Psychotic ◽  
Competent Patient ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Human Rights Act ◽  
The Right

<strong><strong></strong></strong><p align="LEFT"><em>R (on the application of PS) v. G (RMO) and W (SOAD) [2003] EWHC 2335 (Admin). Administrative Court (10th October 2003) Mr. Justice Silber.</em></p><p align="LEFT">This is the most recent in a series of cases regarding the scope of the Human Rights Act and compulsory treatment under the Mental Health Act 1983. In particular, this case concerns the right of a competent patient detained under section 37 of the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) to refuse anti-psychotic medication, and the scope of articles 3, 8 and 14 of the ECHR.</p>

scholarly journals Placed Amongst Strangers – the Tenth Biennial Report (2001–2003) of the Mental Health Act Commission

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (10) ◽  
pp. 44
Author(s):  
Mat Kinton
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Mental Health Patients ◽  
Do So

<p>The Mental Health Act Commission’s Tenth Biennial Report was laid before Parliament and published in December 2003. The report covers two years’ activity – financial years 2001 to 2003 – monitoring the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983 as it relates to the detention and treatment of patients. In twenty chapters it deals with a range of issues pertinent to the care of mental health patients subject to compulsory treatment.</p><p>I will not attempt here to list systematically the points made by our report. Readers of this journal are likely already to have thumbed a copy of the report itself, or accessed it on the Commission website, and, if not, I hope that this article will encourage them to do so. Instead, I will seek to explain in more general terms the context and themes of the report, and what we would wish to see as its desired outcome.</p>

How the statutory health attorney provision in Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld) is incompatible with human rights

2020 ◽  
pp. 103985622096840
Author(s):  
Neeraj S Gill ◽  
Kathryn Turner
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Conflict Of Interest ◽  
Compulsory Treatment ◽  
Persons With Disabilities ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
The Will ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
Equal Recognition ◽  
The Individual

Objective: Mental Health Act 2016 (Qld ) (MHA 2016) includes many ‘less restrictive ways’ to minimise involuntary/compulsory treatment. One such measure, the statutory health attorney, has been adopted from the Powers of Attorney Act 1998 (Qld). This paper analyses the statutory health attorney provision against the human rights framework adopted by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). Method: The statutory health attorney provision was analysed against the CRPD article 12 (equal recognition before the law). Results: The statutory health attorney provision is not based on the will and preferences of the individual, is not free from conflict of interest and is not subject to the required safeguards. Conclusion: The use of a statutory health attorney brings mental health and physical health under the same provision (the fusion law/proposal). However, the statutory health attorney provision is not compatible with the contemporary human rights framework adopted by the CRPD.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document