Burstow (Ed.), Psychiatry interrogated: An institutional ethnography anthology (pp. Lawyering for the 'Mad': Social organization and legal representation for involuntary-admission cases in Poland. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 13, 100– 109. The therapeutic intent of the New Zealand mental health review tribunal. Psychiatrists' views and experiences of the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003. Carswell, C., Donaldson, A., & Brown, K.Mental health tribunals – Rights, protection, or treatment? Lessons from the ARC linkage grant study? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 18, 137– 159. Australian Journal of Human Rights, 13, 181– 208. Mental health tribunals: Rights drowning in unchartered health waters. Australian mental health tribunals-'space' for rights, protection, treatment and governance? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 35, e494– 10. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 18, 44– 68. ‘Odyssey of hope': The role of carers in mental health tribunal processes and systems of mental health care. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law, 16, 90– 107. Mental health tribunal processes and advocacy arrangements: 'Little wins' are no small feat. The united nations convention on the rights of persons with disabilities and mental health law. Health & Social Care in the Community, 24, e181– e190. Community treatment orders: Exploring the paradox of personalisation under compulsion. Barriers to mental health treatment: Results from the WHO world mental health surveys. E., Al-Hamzawi, A., Borges, G., … Kessler, R. This article suggests that mental health tribunals may need to do more to safeguard legislative principles and human rights standards that promote patient autonomy.
The findings call into question whether mental health tribunals necessarily operate in compliance with international human rights standards. Eight themes were identified across the literature and these were participation, information and understanding, patient representation, the power of the medical domain, feelings of powerlessness, perceptions of fairness, risk and the impact on relationships. Thirty-two studies met the inclusion criteria. All study designs were included within this review, provided they reported empirical findings. A systematic search of the literature was conducted on the 17 April 2018 for articles published between 20 in MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsychINFO, ASSIA and Web of Science. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise international evidence on this and to assess the extent to which this is reflected in such literature. As a result, questions have arisen over the extent to which mental health tribunals are indeed operating in line with their legislative intentions and international human rights requirements. Despite this, they have been criticised for being dominated by the medical domain, focusing rigidly on legal criteria and for restricting human rights, including the rights to liberty and access to justice. They are generally designed to provide safeguards for individuals subject to compulsory treatment by testing whether national legislative criteria and international human rights standards have been met.
Mental health tribunals are responsible for making decisions about compulsory treatment for individuals considered a risk to themselves and others due to mental disorder.
0 kommentar(er)
