scholarly journals Code of Practice 1999: navigating before reform of the Mental Health Act 1983

2000 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-4
Author(s):  
Julian C. Hughes ◽  
Tony Lawson
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Public Safety ◽  
Green Paper ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Health Legislation

Mental health legislation must steer a course between Scylla and Charybdis. Scylla represents the notion of individual liberties; Charybdis represents the notion of safety and, in particular, public safety. At the time of writing a Green Paper is expected in 1999, so reform of the Mental Health Act 1983 is on its way. Meanwhile, does the new Code of Practice (Department of Health & Welsh Office, 1999), in force since 1 April 1999, give us any indication as to the course we might be steering?

scholarly journals Mental health legislation in Egypt

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 64-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nasser Loza ◽  
Mohamed El Nawawi
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Services ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
History Of ◽  
Health Legislation

This paper first briefly reviews the history of psychiatric services in Egypt. It then details the legislation in place during the last years of the Mubarak regime and goes on to set out recent developments, in particular the Code of Practice introduced for the Mental Health Act of 2009.

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 ‘Juridogenic’ harm: statutory principles for the new mental health tribunals

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 331-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
W. Obomanu ◽  
H. G. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Green Paper ◽  
Expert Committee ◽  
Proper Place ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Explicit Statement ◽  
First Time ◽  
Health Review

The new Mental Health Act for England and Wales is likely to extend the powers of mental health review tribunals (MHRTs) by giving tribunals the power to approve all compulsory treatment (Department of Health, 1999a, b). The medical member may be dropped entirely from the tribunal's proceedings (Richardson & Machin, 2000). In Ireland, a proposed new Mental Health Act will introduce MHRTs for the first time (Calvert, 2000). The 1983 Mental Health Act contains no explicit statement of underlying principles, although some were introduced in the revised Code of Practice. The Expert Committee (Department of Health, 1999b) suggested that the new Act should specify broad principles where these would help in statutory interpretation, particularly because a range of practitioners working in different settings will be required to understand and implement its provisions. The Green Paper initially suggested that the proper place for setting out principles should be a Code of Practice, but ended by inviting comments on the principles proposed by the Expert Committee, and on whether inclusion of principles would aid interpretation of the new Act.

Mental health legislation in Egypt

2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 64-66
Author(s):  
Nasser Loza ◽  
Mohamed El Nawawi
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Psychiatric Services ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Recent Developments ◽  
History Of ◽  
Health Legislation

This paper first briefly reviews the history of psychiatric services in Egypt. It then details the legislation in place during the last years of the Mubarak regime and goes on to set out recent developments, in particular the Code of Practice introduced for the Mental Health Act of 2009.

scholarly journals Proportionality of legal discrimination

2010 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-24
Author(s):  
Partha Gangopadhyay
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Legal Duty ◽  
The Government ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Health Legislation

Sir: The article by Zigmond (2009) made for interesting reading. Mental health law is about balancing the need to detain people in order to protect them or other people from harm and the need to respect people's human rights and autonomy. In the UK, there was much concern during the development of recent mental health legislation, in particular the Mental Capacity Act 2005, that the government had got this balance wrong. Many of these concerns have been addressed in the updated Code of Practice to the 1983 Mental Health Act, which is an essential guide to practising under the Act (Department of Health, 2008). There is no legal duty to comply with the Code, but professionals must have regard to it and record the reason for any departure from the guidance (which can be subject to legal challenge).

scholarly journals Unethical Mental Health Law; History Repeats Itself

2014 ◽  
pp. 50 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Zigmond ◽  
A. J. Holland
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Green Paper ◽  
Expert Committee ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Decision Making Capacity ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Health Legislation

<p>The powers enshrined in mental health legislation go directly to fundamental principles central to any caring and democratic society. The tension and dilemma that exists is, on the one hand, the importance of respect for an individual’s right to make decision’s affecting his/her own life to, on the other, the recognition that there are people with mental disabilities that may be vulnerable to abuse and/or neglect and who throughout their lives or at particular times need care and/or treatment, which they may not seek or be able to consent to themselves. In any society it is through case law and statute that an attempt is made to resolve this tension and to ensure that individual rights are not infringed and that those who need care and treatment receive what is in their best interest. Thus a change in such legislation requires the most rigorous of examination and must be judged on the grounds that it a) does not infringe accepted principles such as those of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights and the European Convention, b) is based on sound ethical principles and does not conflict with the established law of the country, and c) it is practicable and achieves the right balance with respect to the potential tension described above. As practising clinicians (one working in an acute psychiatric service the other in a district learning disability service) we are not in a position expertly to judge the first of these but we believe we can contribute to the second and the third. In this paper we consider specifically the reasons for, and the consequences that follow, the failure on the Government’s part to accept the central importance of decision-making capacity assessment in any new mental health legislation.</p><p>The Green Paper proposals for a new Mental Health Act for England and Wales have now been published. A broad definition of ‘mental disorder’ has been retained, a new system of tribunals is to be established and compulsory treatment in the community would become lawful. However, it rejects the recommendation of the expert committee chaired by Professor Richardson that the assessment of an individual’s decision-making capacity should be a determining factor in the use of compulsory detention. Given this, it does not address the relationship between this legislation and the proposed Mental Incapacity Act. The failure to recognise the central place of decision-making capacity in a modern Mental Health Act is, we believe, a serious omission as it is a reflection of a failure to acknowledge that the basic principle of autonomy is central to such legislation.</p>

scholarly journals Least restrictive alternative – advance statements and the new mental health legislation

2002 ◽  
Vol 26 (7) ◽  
pp. 246-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. M. Atkinson ◽  
H. C. Garner
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Home Office ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Advance Statements ◽  
Restrictive Environment ◽  
The Patient’S View ◽  
Health Legislation ◽  
Least Restrictive Alternative

Proposals for new mental health legislation make the case for using the ‘least restrictive alternative’ (Scottish Executive, 2001) and the ‘least restrictive environment’ (Department of Health & Home Office, 2000) as guiding principles in deciding the management and treatment of the patient. This appears to be the case made for introducing compulsory treatment in the community. The patient living in the community, while maintained on medication, rather than the hospital would appear to be defined as on the ‘least restrictive alternative’. This, however, takes only a limited approach to what is ‘restrictive’, which should be interpreted more widely, including the patient's view as well as that of clinicians and policy makers. Thus, a patient may see it as less restrictive during an acute phase to be in hospital and not on medication, than in the community but on medication. It is likely, given our knowledge of patients' attitudes to medication (Eastwood & Pugh, 1997), that many patients will prefer to be on oral medication rather than depot, which they see as less restrictive.

scholarly journals Reform of the Mental Health Act 1983: the Green Paper

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 (4) ◽  
pp. 126-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. S. Zigmond
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
White Paper ◽  
Green Paper ◽  
Closing Date ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Department Of Health

The profession awaits the Government's White Paper on a new Mental Health Act (MHA) with trepidation. At the time of writing, the closing date for consultation on the Green Paper (Department of Health, 1999a) has passed. None the less, discussion and lobbying must continue.

Attitudes and experiences of nursing staff to the Mental Health Act 2001: lessons for future mental health legislation

2014 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 83-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. M. Doherty ◽  
F. Jabbar ◽  
B. D. Kelly
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Nursing Staff ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Clinical Nursing ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Paper Work ◽  
Health Legislation ◽  
The Impact

ObjectivesThe Mental Health Act 2001 was implemented in 2006 to bring Ireland into line with international practice and United Nations Conventions on Human Rights. Previous studies have reported some practical difficulties for the professionals involved. We wished to examine the experiences of nursing staff and the impact of the Act on clinical nursing practice since its implementation.MethodThis cross-sectional survey was conducted by questionnaire. It contained questions examining training in and attitudes to the Act, and any resultant changes in nursing practise.ResultsA total of 317 questionnaires were returned. Of the nurses, 92% reported having received training in the Act, and 56% of nursing staff believed that their workload had increased as a result of the change in legislation. Of those who made a comment, 76.5% were negative, with increased paper work, lack of clarity and an excessive focus on legalities being the most common difficulties reported.ConclusionsNursing staff have shown mixed attitudes to the Mental Health Act 2001, but many of the difficulties encountered are similar to those experienced by other professionals.

scholarly journals Ethnicity and outcome of appeal after detention under the Mental Health Act 1983

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 288-290 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramin Nilforooshan ◽  
Rizkar Amin ◽  
James Warner
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
Ethnic Differences ◽  
Success Rates ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Health Legislation ◽  
Black Caribbean ◽  
Chi Squared ◽  
Health Legislation ◽  
The Relationship

Aims and MethodThere is insufficient research into the relationship between ethnicity and appeals against detention under mental health legislation. We sought to identify rates and success of appeals in different ethnic groups through a retrospective analysis of all detentions under the Mental Health Act 1983 over 1 year.ResultsWe found high rates of appeals overall, with substantial differences between ethnic groups (36 (39%) White British compared with 71 (63%) Black Caribbean (P = 0.0001) and 21 (68%) White Irish (P = 0.01) individuals (Yates corrected chi-squared)). Success rates on appeal were very low in all groups.Clinical ImplicationsThere are significant ethnic differences in appeals against detention under the Mental Health Act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document