Title of article :
Obligatory dangerousness criteria in the involuntary commitment and treatment provisions of Australian mental health legislation
Author/Authors :
King، نويسنده , , Robert and Robinson، نويسنده , , Jacqueline، نويسنده ,
Issue Information :
روزنامه با شماره پیاپی سال 2011
Pages :
7
From page :
64
To page :
70
Abstract :
Objective ntary commitment and treatment (IC&T) of people affected by mental illness may have reference to considerations of dangerousness and/or need for care. While attempts have been made to classify mental health legislation according to whether IC&T has obligatory dangerousness criteria, there is no standardised procedure for making classification decisions. The aim of this study was to develop and trial a classification procedure and apply it to Australiaʹs mental health legislation. eloped benchmarks for ‘need for care’ and ‘dangerousness’ and applied these benchmarks to classify the mental health legislation of Australiaʹs 8 states and territories. Our focus was on civil commitment legislation rather than criminal commitment legislation. s ate changed its legislation during the course of the study resulting in two classificatory exercises. In our initial classification, we were able to classify IC&T provisions in legislation from 6 of the 8 jurisdictions as being based on either ‘need for care’ or ‘dangerousness’. Two jurisdictions used a terminology that was outside the established benchmarks. In our second classification, we were also able to successfully classify IC&T provisions in 6 of the 8 jurisdictions. Of the 6 Acts that could be classified, all based IC&T on ‘need for care’ and none contained mandatory ‘dangerousness’ criteria. sions assification system developed for this study provided a transparent and probably reliable means of classifying 75% of Australiaʹs mental health legislation. The inherent ambiguity of the terminology used in two jurisdictions means that further development of classification may not be possible until the meaning of the terms used has been addressed in case law. With respect to the 6 jurisdictions for which classification was possible, the findings suggest that Australiaʹs mental health legislation relies on ‘need for care’ and not on ‘dangerousness’ as the guiding principle for IC&T.
Keywords :
Mental health legislation , Dangerousness , Australia , Involuntary commitment
Journal title :
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Serial Year :
2011
Journal title :
International Journal of Law and Psychiatry
Record number :
1952903
Link To Document :
بازگشت