Abstract

This paper explores mental health legislation from a philosophical and sociological perspective. It is argued that mental health law exists primarily as a coercive social control instrument and that the maintenance of a separate legislative framework for the mentally ill is based upon dubious legal and philosophical grounds. The need for changes in mental health law has been accelerated by the move in Britain toward care in the community. One of the most important issues at the centre of the debate revolves around the concept of 'dangerousness' and mental disorder. The research into the extent to which the risk of violence can be predicted appears problematic from a reform perspective. Prediction is considered to be the overriding problem that leads to a violation of patients' civil rights, especially in relation to black and ethnic minority groups. Equity in law is necessary for the protection of patient's rights and particularly for the protection of those people who enter mental health care systems concerned with issues of control at the expense of care.

Full Text
Paper version not known

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.