ScholarLens Back to search
2013•Tizard Learning Disability ReviewRequires access

The Mental Health Act. vs the Mental Capacity Act. Is the MHA losing its edge?

John S. Watts, Robin Mackenzie

Open publisher page 1 citations

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the clinical implications of the case of AM and the ruling that the Mental Health Act no longer has primacy over other legislation in certain treatment situations. Design/methodology/approach – Critical case analysis and discussion. Findings – The Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards could be used more widely, and in preference to the Mental Health Act, but this may cause problems to clinicians and other decision makers such as Mental Health Tribunals. Originality/value – This case and its findings have not been widely discussed in academic or clinical practice literature.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the clinical implications of the case of AM and the ruling that the Mental Health Act no longer has primacy over other legislation in certain treatment situations. Design/methodology/approach – Critical case analysis and discussion. Findings – The Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards could be used more widely, and in preference to the Mental Health Act, but this may cause problems to clinicians and other decision makers such as Mental Health Tribunals. Originality/value – This case and its findings have not been widely discussed in academic or clinical practice literature.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the clinical implications of the case of AM and the ruling that the Mental Health Act no longer has primacy over other legislation in certain treatment situations. Design/methodology/approach – Critical case analysis and discussion. Findings – The Mental Capacity Act Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards could be used more widely, and in preference to the Mental Health Act, but this may cause problems to clinicians and other decision makers such as Mental Health Tribunals. Originality/value – This case and its findings have not been widely discussed in academic or clinical practice literature.

Key concepts: Originality, Mental Health Act, Mental health, Mental capacity, Legislation, Preference, Mental health law, Psychology

Related papers

Related paper 1Related paper 2Related paper 3
Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Mental Health Act. vs the Mental Capacity Act. Is the MHA losing its edge? — Research Paper | ScholarLens