header-logo header-logo

31 January 2008 / B Mahendra
Issue: 7306 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Book reviews

The Nearest Relative Handbook

David Hewitt / Jessica Kingsley publishers / RRP £17.99 /
191 pages

The law, in general and until recent years, has taken a somewhat romantic view of the nearest relation, defining such an individual either in terms of blood link or intimate relationship, as being the person most likely to be concerned with another’s welfare. There has not been scope for those more informal relationships—the concept of “best” friend rather than “next” friend—to play a part in legal proceedings.

According to the Mental Health 1983 (MeHA 1983), for the paternalistic purpose of imposing detention and treatment of those who have been afflicted by mental disorder, the nearest relative can apply for the “committal” of a patient or object to his detention. He can also seek the release from detention of a person he believes has been—or now is—wrongly confined. One is here dealing with vulnerable patients, rendered infirm, usually temporarily, by mental disorder. As things stand, the patient has no say in who is chosen as the nearest relative. Only if such a

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll