header-logo header-logo

Liberty, autonomy & the Mental Health Act review

12 January 2018 / Keith Wilding
Issue: 7776 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail
nlj_7776_wilding

Keith Wilding explains why the independent review of the Mental Health Act 1983 should take a broad approach

  • The review must look beyond the 1983 Act, taking account of mental capacity and adult protection.

  • There may be confusion and overlap between various types of intervention.

  • Current thinking on compulsory intervention must be considered.

An independent review of the Mental Health Act 1983, to be chaired by Sir Simon Wessely, a past president of the Royal College of Psychiatrists, was announced by the Prime Minister on 4 October 2017. It appears to have been prompted by, among other things, the rising rates of detention under the 1983 Act of persons suffering from mental disorder but it is no doubt part of the present high profile of mental health issues. A previous review in 1999—The Report of the Expert CommitteeReview of the Mental Health Act 1983 (the Richardson Report)—made cogent analysis of the 1983 Act and made a series of recommendations that never came to

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

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

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