Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. As you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Highlights

  • With, for example, 45% of cases handled by the Southern MHRT Office having no patient represen tation at all2 the injustice to those detained would

  • Whatever opinion is proposed, or decision reached, the view taken has to be justified by reasons that are sufficient to make the case

  • I agree with him that when treating patients it is ments, both clinical and judicial, have to be based not important to have a proper discussion of the ben only upon agreed facts

Read more

Summary

Introduction

For example, 45% of cases handled by the Southern MHRT Office having no patient represen tation at all2 the injustice to those detained would. The doctor in the Mental Health Review appear to be not too many lawyers but, shamefully, Tribunal too few. Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) ( with a holistic approach to patient care the difference might not be as great as at first appears).

Results
Conclusion

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

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.