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

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan—Andrew Savage

Firm expands London disputes practice with senior partner hire

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Druces—Lisa Cardy

Senior associate promotion strengthens real estate offering

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Charles Russell Speechlys—Robert Lundie Smith

Leading patent litigator joins intellectual property team

NEWS
The government’s plan to introduce a Single Professional Services Supervisor could erode vital legal-sector expertise, warns Mark Evans, president of the Law Society of England and Wales, in NLJ this week
Writing in NLJ this week, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers argues that the ‘failure to prevent’ model of corporate criminal responsibility—covering bribery, tax evasion, and fraud—should be embraced, not resisted
Professor Graham Zellick KC argues in NLJ this week that, despite Buckingham Palace’s statement stripping Andrew Mountbatten Windsor of his styles, titles and honours, he remains legally a duke
Writing in NLJ this week, Sophie Ashcroft and Miranda Joseph of Stevens & Bolton dissect the Privy Council’s landmark ruling in Jardine Strategic Ltd v Oasis Investments II Master Fund Ltd (No 2), which abolishes the long-standing 'shareholder rule'
In NLJ this week, Sailesh Mehta and Theo Burges of Red Lion Chambers examine the government’s first-ever 'Afghan leak' super-injunction—used to block reporting of data exposing Afghans who aided UK forces and over 100 British officials. Unlike celebrity privacy cases, this injunction centred on national security. Its use, the authors argue, signals the rise of a vast new body of national security law spanning civil, criminal, and media domains
back-to-top-scroll