IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlawss/v7y2018i2p12-d137934.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decision-Making Behaviour under the Mental Health Act 1983 and Its Impact on Mental Health Tribunals: An English Perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Nicola Glover-Thomas

    (School of Law, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK)

Abstract

In England and Wales, the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA 1983) provides the legal framework which governs decisions made concerning the care and treatment of those suffering from mental disorders, where they may pose a risk to themselves or others. The perspective of the patient and the care provider may conflict and can be a source of tension and challenge within mental health law. Through access to a mental health tribunal, patients are offered the apparatus to review and challenge their detention. With detention rates under the mental health legislation rising exponentially, this is having a knock-on effect upon tribunal application numbers. As there is a legal requirement to review all cases of individuals detained under the MHA 1983, understanding the key drivers for this increase in detention is essential in order to understand how to better manage both detention rates and the upsurge in tribunal caseloads. With the increase in overall activity, mental health tribunal workloads present significant practical challenges and has downstream cost implications.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicola Glover-Thomas, 2018. "Decision-Making Behaviour under the Mental Health Act 1983 and Its Impact on Mental Health Tribunals: An English Perspective," Laws, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-23, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:7:y:2018:i:2:p:12-:d:137934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/7/2/12/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2075-471X/7/2/12/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hood, Christopher & Rothstein, Henry & Baldwin, Robert, 2004. "The Government of Risk: Understanding Risk Regulation Regimes," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199270019.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Julien Etienne, 2015. "Different ways of blowing the whistle: Explaining variations in decentralized enforcement in the UK and France," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 309-324, December.
    2. Aven, Terje & Renn, Ortwin, 2018. "Improving government policy on risk: Eight key principles," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 230-241.
    3. Jeroen van der Heijden & Jitske de Jong, 2009. "Towards a Better Understanding of Building Regulation," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 36(6), pages 1038-1052, December.
    4. Anaïs Valiquette L’Heureux, 2022. "The Case Study of Los Angeles City & County Fraud, Embezzlement and Corruption Safeguards during times of pandemic," Public Organization Review, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 593-610, September.
    5. Peter J. May, 2007. "Regulatory regimes and accountability," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(1), pages 8-26, March.
    6. Julia Black & Robert Baldwin, 2012. "When risk‐based regulation aims low: Approaches and challenges," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), pages 2-22, March.
    7. Mathias Ericson, 2018. "“Sweden Has Been Naïve”: Nationalism, Protectionism and Securitisation in Response to the Refugee Crisis of 2015," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(4), pages 95-102.
    8. Demortain, David, 2008. "Institutional polymorphism: the designing of the European Food Safety Authority with regard to the European Medicines Agency," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 36534, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Govender, Urishanie & van Eck, Gary & Genc, Bekir, 2022. "An integrated 4Cs safety framework for the diamond industry of Southern Africa," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    10. Rudolf URBAN, & Roman URBAN, & Lukáš ŠTĚPà NEK, 2016. "A New Approach To Risk Assessment Based On The Semantic Value Of Expressions," EcoForum, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 5(1), pages 1-30, January.
    11. Löfmarck, Erik & Uggla, Ylva & Lidskog, Rolf, 2017. "Freedom with what? Interpretations of “responsibility” in Swedish forestry practice," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 34-40.
    12. François Dedieu, 2022. "Organized denial at work: The difficult search for consistencies in French pesticide regulation," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(3), pages 951-973, July.
    13. Frédérique Six, 2013. "Trust in Regulatory Relations," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(2), pages 163-185, February.
    14. Peter Taylor-Gooby, 2008. "Sociological approaches to risk: strong in analysis but weak in policy influence in recent UK developments," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 863-876, October.
    15. Arturo Vallejos-Romero & Felipe Sáez Ardura & Minerva Cordoves-Sánchez & César Cisternas & Markku Lehtonen & Luz Karime Sánchez Galvis & Àlex Boso, 2024. "Configuring Socio-Environmental Risks in Chile: Institutional Narratives and Complexities in a Risk Society," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-18, June.
    16. Gale Raj‐Reichert & Cornelia Staritz & Leonhard Plank, 2022. "Conceptualizing the Regulator‐Buyer State in the European Union for the Exercise of Socially Responsible Public Procurement in Global Production Networks," Journal of Common Market Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(3), pages 759-782, May.
    17. Koehler, Johanna & Thomson, Patrick & Goodall, Susanna & Katuva, Jacob & Hope, Rob, 2021. "Institutional pluralism and water user behavior in rural Africa," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    18. Hiriart, Yolande & Martimort, David & Pouyet, Jerome, 2010. "The public management of risk: Separating ex ante and ex post monitors," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(11-12), pages 1008-1019, December.
    19. Jamie K. Wardman, 2008. "The Constitution of Risk Communication in Advanced Liberal Societies," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(6), pages 1619-1637, December.
    20. Wieck, Christine & Rudloff, Bettina, 2007. "The Bioterrorism Act of the USA and international food trade: evaluating WTO conformity and effects on bilateral imports," German Journal of Agricultural Economics, Humboldt-Universitaet zu Berlin, Department for Agricultural Economics, vol. 56(03), pages 1-14.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jlawss:v:7:y:2018:i:2:p:12-:d:137934. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.