Should Supported Decision-Making Replace Substituted Decision-Making? The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities and Coercive Treatment under Queensland’s Mental Health Act 2000

Abstract

In 2013, and again in 2014, the UN Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) has recommended that Australia abolish its existing mental health laws which authorise involuntary treatment and detention, and replace them with a regime of supported decision-making. The Australian Law Reform Commission has also recommended the introduction of supported decision-making to replace mental health and guardianship laws. This paper critically evaluates the concepts of autonomy and discrimination and the social model of disability which provide the theoretical underpinning of the CRPD. Focussing on coercive treatment of adults with severe mental illness under Queensland's Mental Health Act 2000, it then evaluates the advantages and disadvantages of supported decision-making, and concludes that the proposed abolition of involuntary treatment laws is not justified.

Canada Should Retain Its Reservation on the United Nation’s Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities

“…Several international law scholars have concluded that the Committee's interpretations are unrealistic. 7,16,17 We agree and echo Dawson's observation that ' . .…”

“…Several international law scholars have concluded that the Committee’s interpretations are unrealistic. 7,16,17 We agree and echo Dawson’s observation that ‘…the Committee’s approach reveals a famous weakness of rights discourse — its non-consequential character’. 16…”

Decision-making on behalf of people living with dementia: how do surrogate decision-makers decide?

“…Citing Gooding,8 Del Villar7 states “supported decision-making can only be said to occur when, with appropriate assistance and information, individuals can be supported to become aware of the implications of their choices. If this awareness does not develop, even with support, there is no scope for the application of the model.…”

The Flag of Imagination: Peru's New Reform on Legal Capacity for Persons with Intellectual and Psychosocial Disabilities and the Need for New Understandings in Private Law

“…However, the understanding of this statement was not clear for everyone. Many argued that in certain cases, when the person with a disability does not understand or cannot act on that understanding, there should be some space for disability-based substitute decision-making (Del Villar, 2015;Dawson, 2015). However, the Committee decided that the functional approach "is flawed for two key reasons: (a) it is discriminatorily applied to people with disabilities; and (b) it presumes to be able to accurately assess the inner-workings of the human mind and, when the person does not pass the assessment, it then denies him or her a core human right -the right to equal recognition before the law" (CRPD Committee, 2014, para.…”