Skip to main content
×
×
Home

A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review

  • T. Cronin (a1), P. Gouda (a2), C. McDonald (a1) (a3) and B. Hallahan (a1) (a3)
Abstract
Objectives

To describe similarities and differences in mental health legislation between five jurisdictions: the Republic of Ireland, England and Wales, Scotland, Ontario (Canada), and Victoria (Australia).

Methods

An in-depth examination was undertaken focussing on the process of involuntary admission, review of Admission Orders and the legal processes in relation to treatment in the absence of patient consent in each of the five jurisdictions of interest.

Results

All jurisdictions permit the detention of a patient if they have a mental disorder although the definition of mental disorder varies between jurisdictions. Several additional differences exist between the five jurisdictions, including the duration of admission prior to independent review of involuntary detention and the role of supported decision making.

Conclusions

Across the five jurisdictions examined, largely similar procedures for admission, detention and treatment of involuntary patients are employed, reflecting adherence with international standards and incorporation of human rights-based principles. Differences exist in relation to the criteria to define mental disorder, the occurrence of automatic review hearings in a timely fashion after a patient is involuntarily admitted and the role for supported decision making under mental health legislation.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
Corresponding author
*Address for correspondence: T. Cronin, Department of Psychiatry, University Hospital Galway, Newcastle Road, Galway H91 YR71, Ireland. (Email: tom.cronin3@hse.ie)
References
Hide All
Carney T, Tait D (2011). Mental health tribunals – rights, protection, or treatment? Lessons from the ARC linkage grant study? Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 18, 137159.
Davidson G, Brophy L, Campbell J, Susan FJ, Gooding P, O’Brien AM (2016). An international comparison of legal frameworks for supported substitute decision-making in mental health services. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 44, 3040.
Department of Health (2010). National standards for mental health services. Department of Health: Australia.
Department of Health (2014). Report of the expert group on the review of the Mental Health Act 2001. (http://www.mhcirl.ie/File/rpt_expgroupreview_mha2001.pdf). Accessed 7 December 2016.
Disfeld K, McKenna B (2006). The therapeutic intent of the New Zealand mental health review tribunal. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 13, 100109.
European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ECHR) (1950). Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. Council of Europe: Rome.
Freeman MC, Kolappa K, de Almeida JMC, Kleinman A, Makhashvlli N, Phakathi S, Saraceno B, Thornicroft G (2015). Reversing hard won victories in the name of human rights: a critique of the General Comment on Article 12 of the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. Lancet Psychiatry 2, 844850.
Gray JE, McSherry BM, O’Reilly RL, Weller PJ (2010). Australian and Canadian Mental Health Acts compared. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry 44, 11261131.
Health Care Consent Act (HCCA) (1996). Ontario. (https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/96h02). 9 Accessed December 2016).
Jabbar F, Kelly BD, Casey P (2010). National survey of psychiatrists’ responses to implementation of the Mental Health Act 2001 in Ireland. Irish Journal of Medical Science 179, 291294.
Kelly BD (2011). Mental health legislation and human rights in England, Wales and the Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 34, 439454.
Kelly BD (2014). An end to psychiatric detention? Implications of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. British Journal of Psychiatry 204, 174175.
Mental Health Act (MHA) (1990). Ontario. (https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/90m07). Accessed 9 December 2016.
Mental Health Act (MHA) (2001). Republic of Ireland. (http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2001/act/25/enacted/en/html). Accessed 7 December 2016.
Mental Health Act (MHA) (2007). England and Wales. (http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2007/12/contents). Accessed 9 December 2016.
O’Donoghue B, Lyne J, Hill M, Larkin C, Feeney L, O’Callaghan E (2010). Involuntary admission from the patients’ perspective. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology 45, 631638.
Ramsay H, Roche E, O’Donoghue B (2013). Five years after implementation: a review of the Irish Mental Health Act 2001. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 36, 8391.
Smyth S, Casey D, Cooney A, Higgins A, McGuinness D, Bainbridge E, Keys M, Georgieva I, Brosnan L, Beecher C, Hallahan B, McDonald C, Murphy K (2016). A qualitative exploration of stakeholders’ perspectives of involuntary admission under the Mental Health Act 2001 in the Republic of Ireland. International Journal of Mental Health Nursing (in press).
Solomon R, O’Reilly R, Nikolic M, Gray J (2009). Treatment delayed liberty denied. Canadian Bar Review 87, 679719.
Szmukler G, Daw R, Callard F (2014). Mental Health Law and the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 37, 245252.
Szmukler G, Daw R, Dawson J (2010). A model law fusing incapacity and mental health legislation. International Journal of Mental Health Law 11, 1124.
Szmukler G, Kelly BD (2016). We should replace conventional mental health law with capacity-based law. British Journal of Psychiatry 209, 449453.
The Constitution Act (1982). Schedule B to the Canada Act 1982 (UK). (https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/laws/stat/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11/latest/schedule-b-to-the-canada-act-1982-uk-1982-c-11.htm). Accessed 6 March 2017.
Thom K, Nakarada-Kordic I (2014). Mental health review tribunals in action: a systematic review of the empirical literature. Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 21, 112126.
United Nations (UN) (1991). Principles for the Protection of Persons with Mental Illness and the Improvement of Mental Health Care. United Nations: New York, NY.
United Nations (UN) (2006). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. United Nations: New York, NY.
World Health Organisation (WHO) (1996). Mental Health Care Law: Ten Basic Principles. WHO: Geneva.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine
  • ISSN: 0790-9667
  • EISSN: 2051-6967
  • URL: /core/journals/irish-journal-of-psychological-medicine
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords:

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 4
Total number of PDF views: 52 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 115 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 23rd November 2017 - 17th December 2017. This data will be updated every 24 hours.