Involuntary Detention and Therapeutic Jurisprudence

International developments within the last twenty years have demonstrated controversial shifts in treatment for people with mental illnesses and the care of persons with intellectual disabilities. These shifts have been apparent in an emphasis on deinstitutionalization, increased scrutiny of detention and discharge decisions and, in some countries, in enforced treatment and care in the community. As we become increasingly conscious of the political and moral dimensions of civil commitment, these concerns are reflected in the professional literature, but this does not often enough focus on issues of clinical and legal principle, nor is it in a form which encourages comparative analysis. This collection draws on contributors from the UK, the USA, Australia, the Netherlands, Canada and New Zealand, who share a commitment to evaluating whether the civil detention processes protect the liberty, dignity and justice interests of those with mental illnesses and intellectual disabilities. The book is written from a therapeutic jurisprudence perspective and poses a number of questions with international application, such as: Are more categories of people being detained? Is involuntary detention serving new purposes? Are different forms of detention gaining credence and being more widely utilized? And, are admission decisions and review of detention decisions transparent, consistent, and just?

Ian Freckelton is a Barrister and also a Professor at Monash University, Australia. Kate Diesfeld works at the Auckland University of Technology, New Zealand

Contents: Introduction: Introduction, Kate Diesfeld and Ian Freckelton. International Approaches: A therapeutic jurisprudence model for civil commitment, Bruce J. Winick; Involuntary treatment: searching for principles, Genevra Richardson; The rights of involuntarily admitted psychiatric patients: European developments, Johan Legemaate. Involuntary Detention of Those with Mental Illnesses: Where is the asylum?, Suzy Stevens; Decision-making by psychiatrists about involuntary detention, Ruth Vine; Choosing among options for compulsory care, John Dawson; All locked up with nowhere to go: treatment refusal in the involuntarily hospitalized psychiatric population in Canada, Mona Gupta. Review of Involuntary Detention Decision-Making: The release of Judge Schreber in Saxony 1902: an historic example of modern decision-making about involuntary detention, Ian Freckelton; Therapeutic potential in review of involuntary detention, Stephanie du Fresne; Mental heath review tribunals, Elizabeth Perkins; Patients' views of the mental health review tribunal procedure in England, Nicola Ferencz; Discharge of restricted patients from special hospitals in England and Wales: law and practice, Lucy Scott-Moncrieff. Legal Criteria for Involuntary Detention of Those with Mental Illnesses: Involuntary detention decision-making, criteria and hearing procedures: an opportunity for therapeutic jurisprudence in action, Ian Freckelton; Capacity and confinement; when is detention not detention?, Peter Bartlett; Insights on 'Insight': the impact of extra-legislative factors on decisions to discharge detained patients, Kate Diesfeld; Involuntary detention of persons found not guilty of murder by reason of mental impairment or found unfit to stand trial: a new jurisprudence from Victoria, Ian Freckelton. Involuntary Outpatient Detention: Coerced community treatment: international trends and outcomes, Virginia Aldige' Hiday; Mandated community treatment: the potential role of violence risk assessment, John Monahan; A clinical perspective on involuntary outpatient treatment: efficacy and ethics, Alexander I.F. Simpson; Rights issues in compulsory community treatment, Sylvia Bell. Intellectual Disabilities and Involuntary Detention: Throwing away the key: people with intellectual disability and involuntary detention, Kelley Johnson and Sue Tait; New Zealand's intellectual disability (compulsory care) legislation, Warren J. Brookbanks; Criteria for discharge of people with learning disabilities: a comparative analysis, Kate Diesfeld; Bibliography; Index.

Status der Barrierefreiheit
Barrierefreiheitsstatus unbekannt