Abstract
This paper concerns itself with the question of involuntary commitment of psychiatric patients in southwestern Manitoba. The purpose was to survey the reasons given for involuntary psychiatric hospitalization by a group of Manitoba physicians in 1979, and to compare these reasons with those given by their Ontario counterparts, as described in the Page and Yates (1) and Page and Firth (2) studies. Particularly, the aim was to compare the relative emphasis given to dangerousness/self-harm reasons, in view of the fact that Manitoba's Mental Health Act makes no explicit reference to the dangerousness criterion, while Ontario's legislation has increasingly specified this factor as a necessary condition for civil commitment.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Canadian journal of psychiatry. Revue canadienne de psychiatrie
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.