header-logo header-logo

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

Liberty, autonomy & the Mental Health Act review

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

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

Keystone Law—Milena Szuniewicz-Wenzel & Ian Hopkinson

International arbitration team strengthened by double partner hire

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Coodes Solicitors—Pam Johns, Rachel Pearce & Bradley Kaine

Firm celebrates trio holding senior regional law society and junior lawyers division roles

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Michelman Robinson—Sukhi Kaler

Partner joins commercial and business litigation team in London

NEWS
The Legal Action Group (LAG)—the UK charity dedicated to advancing access to justice—has unveiled its calendar of training courses, seminars and conferences designed to support lawyers, advisers and other legal professionals in tackling key areas of public interest law
Refusing ADR is risky—but not always fatal. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed and Sanjay Dave Singh of the University of Leicester analyse Assensus Ltd v Wirsol Energy Ltd: despite repeated invitations to mediate, the defendant stood firm, made a £100,000 Part 36 offer and was ultimately ‘wholly vindicated’ at trial
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
back-to-top-scroll