scholarly journals Fusion of mental health and incapacity legislation

2006 ◽  
Vol 188 (6) ◽  
pp. 504-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Dawson ◽  
George Szmukler
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Mental Illnesses ◽  
Law Reform ◽  
Medical Law ◽  
Mentally Disordered ◽  
Commitment Schemes ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
The Uk

SummaryThe enactment of a single legislative scheme governing nonconsensual treatment of both ‘physical’ and ‘mental’ illnesses, based on incapacity principles, has been mooted in recent law reform debates in the UK. We propose a framework for such legislation and consider in more detail the provisions it should contain. The design of legislation that combines the strengths of both incapacity and civil commitment schemes can be readily imagined, based on the criteria for intervention in England and Wales found in the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Such legislation would reduce unjustified legal discrimination against mentally disordered persons and apply consistent ethical principles across medical law.

scholarly journals The Mental Capacity Act and mental healthcare in prison: opportunities and challenges

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (7) ◽  
pp. 241-243 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sharon Davies ◽  
Claire Dimond
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Healthcare ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
People With Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
The Uk

SummaryThe UK Mental Health Act 1983 does not apply in prison. The legal framework for the care and treatment of people with mental illness in prison is provided by the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We raise dilemmas about its use. We highlight how assessing best interests and defining harm involves making challenging judgements. How best interests and harm are interpreted has a potentially significant impact on clinical practice within a prison context.

scholarly journals The concept of objection under the DOLS regime

2014 ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Matthew McKillop ◽  
John Dawson ◽  
George Szmukler
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Treatment ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Mental Health Patient ◽  
Health Treatment ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Mentally Disordered ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Hospitalised Patient

<p>In England and Wales, there are now two regimes under which an adult can be deprived of liberty when receiving mental health treatment: the regime established by the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA), and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) authorisation regime established by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Where both regimes might apply to a mentally disordered person in hospital for mental health treatment, a major dividing line between them is the ability of the patient to “object” to being a mental health patient or to being given mental health treatment. If such an objection occurs, a hospitalised patient is ineligible for the DOLS regime and only the MHA regime may be used to authorise the deprivation of their liberty.</p>

The law in England and Wales on mental health treatment in the community

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jo Beswick ◽  
Michael Gunn
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Treatment ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Community Treatment ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Mentally Disordered ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mentally Disordered Offender ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

This chapter examines the legal framework for the treatment of the mentally disordered offender in the community in England and Wales. It examines both some of the ideological questions underlying the care of this group and the legal mechanisms within which treatment can be provided. The chapter begins by examining the principle, endorsed by the Mental Capacity Act 2005, that voluntary treatment will usually be the norm, regardless of setting. It then considers exceptions to these norm situations where legally mandated treatment in the community is permitted. In England and Wales, most of these exceptions are to be found in three pieces of legislation: the Mental Health Act 1983, as amended in 2007 to include community treatment orders; the Mental Capacity Act 2005, with its associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS); and the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

The rebirth of medical paternalism: An NHS Trust v Y

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Foster
Keyword(s):  
Patient Autonomy ◽  
Public Funding ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Health Board ◽  
Medical Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Medical Paternalism ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

Over the last quarter of a century, English medical law has taken an increasingly firm stand against medical paternalism. This is exemplified by cases such as Bolitho v City and Hackney Health Authority, Chester v Afshar, and Montgomery v Lanarkshire Health Board. In relation to decision-making on behalf of incapacitous adults, the actuating principle of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 is respect for patient autonomy. The only lawful acts in relation to an incapacitous person are acts which are in the best interests of that person. The 2005 Act requires a holistic assessment of best interests. Best interests are wider than ‘medical best interests’. The 2018 judgment of the Supreme Court in An NHS Trust v Y (which concerned the question of whether a court needed to authorise the withdrawal of life-sustaining clinically administered nutrition/hydration (CANH) from patients in prolonged disorders of consciousness (PDOC)) risks reviving medical paternalism. The judgment, in its uncritical endorsement of guidelines from various medical organisations, may lend inappropriate authority to medical judgments of best interests and silence or render impotent non-medical contributions to the debate about best interests—so frustrating the 2005 Act. To minimise these dangers, a system of meditation should be instituted whenever it is proposed to withdraw (at least) life-sustaining CANH from (at least) patients with PDOC, and there needs to be a guarantee of access to the courts for families, carers and others who wish to challenge medical conclusions about withdrawal. This would entail proper public funding for such challenges.

Nutrition in mental health

2020 ◽  
pp. 753-780
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Eating Disorders ◽  
Developmental Disorders ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

Pharmacotherapy, Developmental disorders, Eating disorders, Dementia, Mental Capacity Act 2005

Mental Health Law

2018 ◽  
pp. 127-140
Author(s):  
Anthony Holland ◽  
Elizabeth Fistein ◽  
Cathy Walsh
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Health Interventions ◽  
Family Context ◽  
Clinical Settings ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Principles ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

Mental health is everyone’s concern, an idea epitomized by the campaign tag line of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, ‘No Health Without Mental Health’. This chapter will demonstrate how an understanding of a patient’s mental health within his/her social and family context is central to clinical practice. We will consider the legal basis for the treatment of mental ill-health and how it can complicate the treatment of physical illness and lead to ethical and legal concerns. The general legal principles that govern health interventions are explored, and two specific statutes for England and Wales—the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983 (as amended 2007)—are both considered in some detail. It will be shown how a sound appreciation of the clinical issues, an understanding of the law, and an ability to apply that law in clinical settings are essential when faced with situations involving mental ill-health.

Best interests provisions in the UK Mental Capacity Act 2005

2012 ◽  
Vol 36 (12) ◽  
pp. 459-462
Author(s):  
Olufunso B. Aribisala
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Reasonable Belief ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
The Uk

SummaryThe Mental Capacity Act 2005 is a critical statute law for psychiatrists in England and Wales. Its best interests provision is fundamental to substitute decision-making for incapacitated adults. It prescribes a process of and gives structure to substitute decision-making. The participation of the incapacitated adult must be encouraged where practicable. In addition to this, ‘the best interests checklist’ must be applied in every case before a practitioner can arrive at a reasonable belief that the action or decision taken on behalf of an incapacitated adult is in his best interests. Most commentators have shown goodwill towards the workings of the Act and want it to succeed.

8. Mental health

2021 ◽  
pp. 134-155
Author(s):  
Jo Samanta ◽  
Ash Samanta
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Health Disorders ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Community Treatment ◽  
Legal Reforms ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Health Disorders ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Discharge From Hospital

This chapter focuses on statutory provisions governing mental health and mental health disorders, with particular reference to the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. It first outlines modern approaches to mental disorders, including legal reforms and the MHA 1983 Code of Practice (2015). It considers the main routes by which patients are admitted to the mental health system (voluntary or involuntary), deprivation of liberty, including Cheshire West and the proposed liberty protection safeguards, and the issue of consent with regards to medical treatment. Finally, the chapter discusses community care that must be provided to people with mental health disorders following discharge from hospital, particularly aftercare and supervised community treatment orders. Relevant cases are considered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document