Beyond Easy Answers: Facing the Entanglements of Violence and Psychosis

Jones, Nev; Shattell, Mona

doi:10.3109/01612840.2013.856971

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Critics also challenge mental health detention's claim to manage risk, querying whether mental disorder is associated with greater risks to self and others than general risks within the population (Jones and Shattell, 2014); whether those risks are sufficiently well defined (Fanning, 2018); whether psychiatry can accurately predict and effectively manage those risks, and whether risk-focused interventions ultimately cause greater harm than good (Szmukler and Rose, 2013). Meanwhile detention premised on the 'risk' + 'mental disorder' formula is considered discriminatory, singling out those so labelled for coercive interventions not practised on other 'risky' members of society (for example, Campbell and Heginbotham, 1991;Minkowitz, 2006-7).…”

Section: Legal Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution

Series¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The book cover is black, with the title and author's name in white writing at the top, and the publisher's logo at the bottom. Below the title is an image of room with light coming in through windows and a large pair of glass doors, which are thrown open, on the right-hand side. On the left is a short flight of stairs leading to another room. The warm colour and low angle of the light suggest it is early morning or evening. The room inside is lit up but the small square frames on the doors and windows cast long shadows. You can glimpse trees outside the window. The room is unfurnished, with a brown carpet, white ceiling tiles and long strip lights, which are turned off. The photograph is of a large room -possibly a day room -in the West Sussex County Asylum, later known as Graylingwell Hospital, which closed in 2003. The photographs were taken in 2017 by two (anonymous) brothers, whose website, The Time Chamber (https:// the time cham ber.co.uk/ ), documents empty and derelict buildings, including many former asylums.

show abstract

Section: Legal Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution

Series¹

2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Freeman et al 2015;Appelbaum 2016). Some prominent users and survivors of psychiatry have also expressed concern about this absolutist position (Plumb in Spandler et al 2015;Jones and Shattell 2014;Rose in Bhugra et al 2017: 794). The question of whether the Convention does in fact prohibit all forms of mental health detention, treatment without consent and restrictions on legal capacity is a matter of ongoing discussion and debate (Bantekas et al 2018).…”

Section: From Vulnerable To Empowered?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Disability and human rights

Series¹

2019

Routledge Handbook of Disability Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Certainly, the issue of coercion-as with all others-is not uniformly agreed upon by commentators who write from the perspective of lived experience of mental health crises (see for example, [28] and cf. [66]). Public action toward implementation will require new partnerships and institutional mechanisms that are particularly responsive to the demands of the most disadvantaged in society.…”

Section: Deliberative Law Reform Involving High-level Participation Omentioning

confidence: 99%

Querying the Call to Introduce Mental Capacity Testing to Mental Health Law: Does the Doctrine of Necessity Provide an Alternative?

Gooding

Flynn

2015

Laws

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Trends in international human rights law have challenged States globally to rethink involuntary mental health interventions from a non-discrimination perspective. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) in particular prohibits laws that discriminate on the basis of disability. However, a key criterion for compulsory mental health treatment under typical mental health legislation is a psychiatric diagnosis (in conjunction with risk of harm and other criteria). Hence, for people with mental health disabilities, rights to liberty and consent in healthcare are held to a different standard compared to other citizens. A prominent law reform option being explored by some governments and commentators for achieving non-discrimination is to replace the diagnostic criterion for triggering involuntary intervention with an assessment of mental capacity. After all, every citizen is subject to restrictions on autonomy where they are deemed to lack mental capacity, such as where concussion necessitates emergency service. However, the use of mental capacity "testing" is seen by diverse commentators as wanting in key respects. A prominent criticism comes from the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, which considers mental capacity assessments a form of disability-based discrimination. This article queries the call to replace the diagnostic criterion in mental health law with an assessment of mental capacity in the light of jurisprudence on equality and non-discrimination in international human rights law. Instead, we examine the doctrine of necessity as an area of law, which might help identify specific thresholds for overriding autonomy in emergency circumstances that can be codified in a non-discriminatory

show abstract

Beyond Easy Answers: Facing the Entanglements of Violence and Psychosis

Cited by 6 publications

References 20 publications

Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution

Deprivation of Liberty in the Shadows of the Institution

Disability and human rights

Querying the Call to Introduce Mental Capacity Testing to Mental Health Law: Does the Doctrine of Necessity Provide an Alternative?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About