header-logo header-logo

A call for order

15 February 2007 / Neil Allen
Issue: 7260 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail

Health care professionals must exercise restraint before revolving the hospital door, says Neil Allen

The psychiatric and legal professions are often uncomfortable bedfellows. One area of particular controversy concerns the re-admission of patients released into the community by mental health review tribunals. The detaining authorities will inevitably disagree with discharge decisions. Indeed, such is the fluctuating nature of mental disorder that episodes of acute illness following hospitalisation are not uncommon as patients react to the pressures of community life. However, due deference to clinical freedom must sometimes yield to legitimate fears over arbitrary detention. R (Care Principles Ltd) v Mental Health Review Tribunal and others [2006] EWHC 3194 (Admin) serves as a timely reminder that health care professionals must exercise restraint before revolving their hospital door.

The proceedings

Following his aggressive behaviour towards hostel staff and fellow residents, and threats to social workers, a young man with mild learning disabilities was detained in a medium-security hospital for psychiatric assessment. In the absence of a sufficient causal link between his conduct and mental disorder

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll