Application of the Paternalism Principle to Constitutional Rights: Mental Health Case-Law in Ireland

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-21
Author(s):  
Darius Whelan

Abstract In adjudicating on matters relating to fundamental constitutional or human rights, courts make important statements about the principles which apply. The principles articulated will have a profound impact on the outcomes of such cases, and on the development of case-law in the relevant field. In the fields of medical law and mental health law, various courts have moved away from deference to medical decision-making and paternalism to a person-centred rights-based approach. However, courts in Ireland have continued to interpret mental health law in a paternalistic fashion, praising paternalism as if it is particularly suitable for mental health law. This raises profound questions about judicial attitudes to people with mental health conditions and judicial reluctance to confer full personhood on people with disabilities. This article outlines case-law in Ireland regarding paternalism in mental health law and discusses the consequences for constitutional rights in Ireland.

2020 ◽  
pp. 233-272
Author(s):  
Jonathan Herring

This chapter first considers statistics on mental health in the UK. It then discusses the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983; the MHA 1983 Code of Practice; reforms to the law under the 2007 Act; problems in mental health practice; critics of mental health; and paternalism as the ground for detention. It highlights the difficulty in striking the correct balance between protecting the public from the perceived threat of mentally disordered people and protecting the rights of those who suffer mental illness. The chapter also illustrates how the principle of autonomy, which plays such an important role in medical law and ethics, is given much less prominence in the area of mental health law.


2014 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 93-94
Author(s):  
David Jimenez ◽  
Christina Alejandrina Eguiguren ◽  
Dominic Dougall ◽  
Bartłomiej Pliszka ◽  
Ian Hall

Mental health law in Peru is developing. The Peruvian Constitution enshrines important human rights principles in relation to people with mental health problems but the enactment of such principles into national legislation is very patchy. This means that people with mental health problems, especially those admitted to hospital, may not receive optimum care and may be at risk of having their human rights breached. In this article we consider how far the current national legislation meets these constitutional rights and what the legislation that is in development may ultimately achieve.


Author(s):  
Jonathan Herring

This chapter first considers statistics on mental health in the UK. It then discusses the Mental Health Act (MHA) 1983; the MHA 1983 Code of Practice; reforms to the law under the 2007 Act; problems in mental health practice; critics of mental health; and paternalism as the ground for detention. It highlights the difficulty in striking the correct balance between protecting the public from the perceived threat of mentally disordered people and protecting the rights of those who suffer mental illness. The chapter also illustrates how the principle of autonomy, which plays such an important role in medical law and ethics, is given much less prominence in the area of mental health law.


PsycCRITIQUES ◽  
1996 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen L. Golding

1981 ◽  
Vol 26 (12) ◽  
pp. 926-928
Author(s):  
Steven Wallach

1989 ◽  
Vol 34 (9) ◽  
pp. 872-873
Author(s):  
David L. Shapiro

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 62-62
Author(s):  
George Ikkos

2020 ◽  
Vol 29 (21) ◽  
pp. 1296-1297
Author(s):  
Richard Griffith

Richard Griffith, Senior Lecturer in Health Law at Swansea University, considers the role of the nearest relative, a statutory friend, appointed for patients detained under the Mental Health Act 1983


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document