header-logo header-logo

Mental health law & the case for tribunals (Pt 2)

20 October 2017 / Keith Wilding
Issue: 7766 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail
nlj_7766_wilding

Where coercion meets care: Keith Wilding discusses the benefits of tribunal hearings in the mental health context

  • The nature of disability & the role of coercion.
  • The ‘subtle’ role of the mental health tribunals.

In May 2017 the Prime Minister made a speech in which she referred to a ‘flawed’ Mental Health Act 1983 which often results in detention, disproportionate effects, and forced treatment of vulnerable people. This appears to seriously underestimate the complexities involved in the operation of the Act, of the concept of disability, of the use of coercive care in the mental health field, and of the role of the law in these circumstances.

The case of Mr A

The case of Mr A illustrates the point. He is 25 years old, did well at school and went to university where his mental health deteriorated. He was unable to continue his studies and returned home to his family. Over a two-year period he worsened to the extent that he was not eating, was unable

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