Author:
Szmukler George,Richardson Genevra,Owen Gareth
Abstract
SummaryIn a landmark decision, the Supreme Court of the UK ruled that the state has a special operational duty to protect the right to life in informal psychiatric in-patients (‘Rabone case'), in sharp distinction to general medical or surgical patients. We will argue that the significance of this case is general, not just local, and that it exposes four important unresolved problems in mental health law: the place of decision-making capacity; the meaning of ‘informal’ admission; parity between mental and physical health; and the accuracy of risk assessment.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health
Reference16 articles.
1. Inner London collaborative audit of admission in two health districts. III: Reasons for acute admission to psychiatric wards;Flannigan;Br J Psychiatry,1994
2. Prevalence of mental incapacity in medical inpatients and associated risk factors: cross-sectional study
3. Rabone and another v Pennine Care NHS Foundation Trust [2012] UKSC 2.
4. Edwards v United Kingdom (2002) 36 EHRR 487.
5. Rabone and Pennine Care NHS Trust [2009] EWHC 1827 (QB).
Cited by
8 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献