Sections of the Mental Health Act Explained

The ‘Mental Health Act 2007’ is another piece of legislation that would allow an Adult such as Colin to be safeguarded. The act is the law in England and Wales that allows people with a mental disorder to be admitted into hospital, detained and treated without their consent. The reason for this would be due to the individual’s health and safety or for the protection of others. (Department of Health, 2015) If Colin was to deteriorate and not receive help he could become a danger to himself and others due to his increasing anger outbursts and frustration. There are 10 main principles when considering the act, the 10 principles are as followed: past and present your wishes are taken into account, you get the information and support you need to

Essentially, during the civil commitment stage of the offender's sentence, a judge or jury must legally determine whether, beyond a reasonable doubt, the person meets the definition of mental illness, a danger to themselves or others, or guilty of a crime. If this is so determined, then the person will be civilly committed to a special Commitment Center for control, care and treatment until the person's

When it comes to forensic mental health service provision, one of the most essential elements to understand from a legal perspective is what is actually allowable by law in terms of involuntary care provision (Guide, 2000; Mental Health Act, 2000). While social workers

To execute a man who is severely deranged without treatment, and arguably incompetent when treated, is the pinnacle of what Justice Marshall called 'the barbarity of exacting mindless vengeance. This leaves those doctors who are treating psychotic, condemned prisoners in an untenable position: treating the prisoner may provide short-term relief but ultimately result in his execution, whereas leaving him untreated will condemn him to a world such as Singleton's, filled with disturbing delusions and

Once they are jailed, they are prone to mistreatment, and the only way the mentally ill receive ‘’help’’ is by being injected with drugs, which have no medicinal effect on the person. George’s case is also significant in that it proves to show that the judges and officials refused to believe George, but rather they believed a fake doctor who had no prior experience in the medical field, and who had fooled his way into the hospital. Their denial only shows us that they did not have trust in Stevenson when he represented George in his court proceedings, and that they did not trust that

What should the court rule in order to make sure that the GBMI offenders get proper care in psychiatric facilities?

In the course of proper identification, evaluation, and treatment, children and adolescents suffering with mental illness can conduct positive, normal lives. Nevertheless, the devastating majority of children with mental illnesses are unsuccessfully identified and the lack of treatment or support services have led to a subordinate worth of life and violence. The Mental Health Awareness and Improvement Act of 2013 (S. 689) is an inclusive bill proposed to address the extensive issue of mental health. By strongly considering the United States’ struggle against mental illness and school violence, as well as utilizing theoretical constructs to examine the Senate’s bill, a social worker can develop a more holistic perspective that can productively integrate practical insights reached from a variety of different points of view.

The use of mental health courts has been growing in the U.S., which has led to the discussion about how the mental health courts further promote medicalization of deviance; this is true. As outlined by Tammy Seltzer (2005), mental health courts have only been successful due to failures in the

Mental health courts are courts specifically dedicated to offering an alternative option to incarceration for the mentally ill offenders by providing treatment options. The idea of mental health courts is noble, one should not view only the benefits but also the possible detrimental impacts they could have on the public before providing funding. One can only make an informed decision on the merits of mental health courts funding when they weigh the benefits recidivism rates, public safety, equality for the mentally ill against the detrimental effects such as reintegrating convicts back into society, promotion of medicalization of deviance, and the possible unnecessary arrests.

The Equality Act 2010 requires equal treatment regardless of disability to employment as well as private and public service. Therefore employers and service providers must make reasonable adjustments to their workplaces in order to make it suitable and easily accessible for those with disabilities. Learning disability may at times be referred to as learning disorder or learning difficulty. This is when a person's brain is affected by factors that make it difficult for them to receive or process information in the typical manner. This prevents the individual from learning as quickly as someone without the disorder. Those with learning disabilities tend to find it difficult completing tasks when left to their own accord. A person's intellectual impairment can be categorised using their IQ. With an IQ between 50-70 is considered a mild disability, 35-50 is moderate, 20-35 is severe while below 20 is Learning disability occurs when a person's brain development is affected. According to http://www.nhs.uk there are particular situations that affect the development of a person's brain, these includes; 'the mother becoming ill in pregnancy problems during the birth that stop enough oxygen getting to the brain the unborn baby developing certain genes the parents passing certain genes to the unborn baby that make

In cases where a defendant has committed the crimes in question but is clearly mentally ill, a “guilty but mentally ill” verdict is used. The guilty but mentally ill verdict acknowledges when a defendant 's mental illness played a large role in a crime without causing it. A guilty but mentally ill defendant is sentenced in the same way as if the defendant were guilty, then the court decides whether the defendant requires treatment for their mental illness. One criticism of the guilty but mentally ill verdict is that, given the level of mental health resources in prisons and jails, it is not very likely a defendant will actually receive relevant treatment while incarcerated.

The purpose of these specialized health courts are to provide the fundamentals or begin the foundation to break the pattern of worsening mental illnesses and criminal behaviors. In this system the health courts rely on community justice partnership programs which involves the help from social services and mental health treatment facilities. These health courts are equipped with judges, defense attorneys, prosecutors, and other mental health experts that have training in dealing with mental illnesses, familiar with service resources and who are able to provide the proper rehabilitation for the offender. Mental health courts provide jail diversion programs, specialized probation, specialized parole as well as, ongoing mental health assessments that create individual treatment plans and judicial monitoring to aid in the mental health needs of offenders and the safety of the public community. During trial these courts are expected to coordinate with police, sheriff, prosecutors and state and local service systems when prosecuting the offender and confront the problems that contributed to the criminal acts in the minds of the mentally

Since the closure of the asylum’s doors, the prison compound has become the home to mentally ill offenders. They receive help by getting treated, but others, are abused further inside the prison’s walls. Each year, the number of inmates diagnosed increases, but also the ones who get arrested already mentally ill. The public shies away from them, but they also think they should be treated in a hospital, not in a prison. While there are many cases out there, that have either made a significant difference to their treatment, or just a little nudge to change, the numbers do not drop.

The Ontario Mental Health Act has adopted a broad definition of mental health. The term broad has been defined as “any disease or disability in mind” (Mental Health Act, 1990 as cited in Gray et al., 2016). Apart from Ontario, only Quebec has adopted such a definition to mental health. Other jurisdictions have been more specific in defining mental health (Gray et al., 2016). The authors pointed out that the mental health act in

The Mental Health Act is legislation providing the framework, authority and criteria for people experiencing mental health disorders to be admitted involuntary to a Schedule 1 facility for observation, care and treatment.