Involuntary status and mental capacity for treatment decisions under Sections 4, 3, and 57 of Ireland's Mental Health Act, 2001: analysis and recommendations for reform.

IF 1.8 Q3 PSYCHIATRY
IRISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2021-03-22 DOI:10.1017/ipm.2020.136
Katherine Reidy, Brendan D Kelly
{"title":"Involuntary status and mental capacity for treatment decisions under Sections 4, 3, and 57 of Ireland's Mental Health Act, 2001: analysis and recommendations for reform.","authors":"Katherine Reidy, Brendan D Kelly","doi":"10.1017/ipm.2020.136","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although significant progress has been made in Irish mental health law in recent decades, the Mental Health Act, 2001 still falls short of properly protecting human rights. A consideration of human rights developments, both domestically and internationally, highlights the urgent need for reform. In this paper we consider Sections 4 ('Best interests'), 3 ('Mental disorder') and 57 ('Treatment not requiring consent') of the 2001 Act and related recommendations in the 2015 Report of the Expert Group on the Review of the Mental Health Act, 2001, and suggest specific areas for reform. Just as medicine evolves over time, so too does our understanding of human rights and law. While embracing a human rights-based approach to the extent suggested here might be seen as aspirational, it is important to balance achievable goals with higher ideals if progress is to be made and rights are to be respected.</p>","PeriodicalId":46220,"journal":{"name":"IRISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE","volume":" ","pages":"119-124"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRISH JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGICAL MEDICINE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2020.136","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/3/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Although significant progress has been made in Irish mental health law in recent decades, the Mental Health Act, 2001 still falls short of properly protecting human rights. A consideration of human rights developments, both domestically and internationally, highlights the urgent need for reform. In this paper we consider Sections 4 ('Best interests'), 3 ('Mental disorder') and 57 ('Treatment not requiring consent') of the 2001 Act and related recommendations in the 2015 Report of the Expert Group on the Review of the Mental Health Act, 2001, and suggest specific areas for reform. Just as medicine evolves over time, so too does our understanding of human rights and law. While embracing a human rights-based approach to the extent suggested here might be seen as aspirational, it is important to balance achievable goals with higher ideals if progress is to be made and rights are to be respected.

2001 年爱尔兰《精神健康法》第 4、3 和 57 条规定的治疗决定的非自愿状态和精神能力:分析与改革建议。
尽管近几十年来爱尔兰的精神卫生法取得了重大进展,但 2001 年《精神卫生法》仍然没有适当地保护人权。对国内和国际人权发展情况的考虑突出了改革的迫切性。在本文中,我们考虑了 2001 年法案的第 4 条("最佳利益")、第 3 条("精神障碍")和第 57 条("无需同意的治疗"),以及 2015 年《2001 年精神健康法案审查专家组报告》中的相关建议,并提出了改革的具体领域。正如医学随着时间的推移而不断发展,我们对人权和法律的理解也是如此。虽然在本文建议的范围内采用基于人权的方法可能会被视为一种抱负,但如果要取得进展并尊重人权,就必须在可实现的目标与更高的理想之间取得平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.10
自引率
3.90%
发文量
51
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信