scholarly journals Foreword

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (17) ◽  
pp. 5
Author(s):  
John Horne
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Health Education ◽  
Social Care ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Academic Journals ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
Health Review

<p>As readers will be only too aware, the 3rd November 2008 will see the coming into effect of most of the amendments made by the Mental Health Act 2007 to the Mental Health Act 1983. It is also the date on which the Mental Health Review Tribunal becomes one of the new First-tier tribunals within the Health, Education and Social Care Chamber consequent to the provisions of the Tribunals, Courts and Enforcement Act 2007. With the publication of numerous regulations and lengthy Codes, the implementation of the Deprivation of Liberty (formerly a/k Bournewood) safeguards still scheduled to take effect in April 2009, and the Mental Capacity Act 2005 having not yet been in force for even a year, these are very demanding (and interesting) times for all those working in the field covered by mental health law.</p><p>There is so much to be considered and written about, but of course potential authors (particularly at this time) have many other pressing demands made of them, in addition to any requests editors of academic journals may make. Fortunately some have found the time to write for this issue of the JMHL.</p>

scholarly journals Taking Stock

2014 ◽  
pp. 111
Author(s):  
Brenda Hale
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Social Workers ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Huge Amount ◽  
Code Of Practice ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Codes Of Practice ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

<p>We shall be reflecting on the experience of the three recent upheavals in mental health and mental capacity law – the <em>Mental Capacity Act 2005</em>, most of which came into force on 1 October 2007, accompanied by a Code of Practice; the <em>Mental Health Act 2007</em> amendments to the <em>Mental Health Act 1983</em>, most of which came into force on 3 November 2008, accompanied by its two Codes of Practice; and the <em>Mental Health Act 2007</em> amendments to the <em>Mental Capacity Act 2005</em>, bringing in the so-called deprivation of liberty safeguards or DOLS, on 1 April this year, together with another Code of Practice. That is a huge amount of new law for us all to get to grips with. Things have changed a great deal since I first started teaching Mental Health Law to social workers and psychiatrists in this very City in 1971 – nearly 40 years ago.</p>

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.

scholarly journals Changes to the Mental Health and Mental Capacity Acts: implications for patients and professionals

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 226-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Hall ◽  
Afia Ali
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Work Load ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Community Treatment ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
User Groups ◽  
Treatment Changes ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

SummaryThe new Mental Health Act 2007 for England and Wales has introduced substantial amendments to the 1983 Mental Health Act and has also amended the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Most provisions came into effect in November 2008. the introduction of supervised community treatment, changes to professional roles such as the role of ‘responsible clinician’, and the introduction of deprivation of liberty safeguards in the Mental Capacity Act are discussed. Many of the new safeguards in the Act are welcomed by clinicians and service user groups. However, other changes are more controversial and could potentially lead to an increase in the work load of clinicians.

Mental health law

2015 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Brain Injuries ◽  
Ethical Issues ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Health Law ◽  
Mental Health Law ◽  
People With Mental Illness ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

This chapter gives an overview of mental health law. Whilst focusing on the legal specifics in England and Wales, the underlying ethical issues extend to all jurisdictions. It explains the duties that law places on health systems and clinicians to support patients to make decisions about their own health. However, it also explains the legal frameworks in place for children and people with mental illness, brain injuries, learning disabilities, dementia, or personality disorder who may require clinicians to decide their health care. Basic concepts of the Mental Health Act 1983, the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and the Children Act 1989 are described, and parts of the law that psychiatrists need to know are presented concisely and in psychiatric context. The chapter includes a practical approach to mental capacity assessment.

Assessing mental capacity and making decisions

2019 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 187-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Finch
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
England And Wales ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
History Of ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

John Finch, a legal member of the Mental Health Act Commission for England and Wales from its creation by statute in 1983 until 1991, takes a fresh look at the uncomfortable history of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and asks whether the Act has served any useful purpose.

scholarly journals Safeguards for informal patients

2014 ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Aswini Weereratne
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Disorder ◽  
Residential Care ◽  
Elderly Person ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

<p>In light of the plethora of new provisions safeguarding patients who might previously have been cared for and treated informally, it may be instructive to consider who may now be considered a truly informal patient, i.e. one for whom neither process nor formality is needed. When applied to an incapacitated<br />patient requiring treatment for mental disorder, the word “informal” may now seem oxymoronic and possibly redundant. Can such a patient ever be truly informal? Part IV of the model statute suggests that an informal patient is one who lacks capacity and does not object to proposed treatment which is in their best interests, or a patient who may be treated without the use of compulsory powers; but even such a patient must now be subject to some formality if their care or treatment is to be long term or they are to be deprived of their liberty in order to ensure proper safeguards are in place.</p><p>Currently the boundary between the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (“MCA”) and Mental Health Act 1983 (“MHA”) is essentially one determined by whether the patient objects to treatment and is defined with formidable complexity in schedule 1A to the MCA. A patient eligible for MCA deprivation of liberty (“DOL”) safeguards, who could be an elderly person in long term residential care, is now subject to formal<br />processes. There is little true informality for a patient lacking treatment capacity. It is questionable whether even a capacitated patient with mental disorder, who is by definition vulnerable, may be treated informally under the MHA4 if they feel suborned into consenting by the possibility of coercion. The terminology offers a slightly deceptive impression of a benign approach with concomitant levels of<br />autonomy, but while it is appropriate to highlight a difference from compulsory process and keep formality to a minimum for the sake of informality, it is also important not to overplay formality in the name of safeguards. The latter appears to be the vice in which the MCA and MHA is now arguably gripped.</p>

scholarly journals Interface between the Mental Health Act and Mental Capacity Act: deprivation of liberty safeguards

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (6) ◽  
pp. 430-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nick Brindle ◽  
Tim Branton
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Residential Homes ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act

SummaryThe deprivation of liberty safeguards were introduced into the Mental Capacity Act in 2008 to enhance the protection of adults in residential homes or hospitals who lack capacity in relation to their care arrangements and who are or may be deprived of their liberty. Deprivation of liberty itself is an imprecise concept and there may be difficulty in applying the appropriate authority where there is a choice between the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Mental Health Act 1983. Therefore, this article explains the evolution of mental capacity legislation and the concept of deprivation of liberty, how it may be recognised, prevented and authorised by deprivation of liberty safeguards, along with some of the interface issues with the Mental Health Act 1983.

scholarly journals Deprivations of Liberty: Mental Health Act or Mental Capacity Act?

2014 ◽  
Vol 1 (16) ◽  
pp. 170
Author(s):  
Richard Jones
Keyword(s):  
Mental Health ◽  
Mental Capacity ◽  
Mental Health Act ◽  
The Poor ◽  
Mental Capacity Act 2005 ◽  
Mental Capacity Act ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Poor Relation

<p align="LEFT">The provisions of the Mental Health Act 2007 which amend the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) so as to provide for a procedure that can be used to authorise the deprivation of the liberty of a mentally incapacitated person are intended to sit alongside existing Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) powers. But the nature of the relationship between the two Acts is far from clear. This article suggests that the new MCA procedure could be very much the poor relation of the MHA.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document