The Impact Of The Mental Health Act

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005) introduced a statutory framework for advance decision making in England and Wales building upon the common law recognition of advance decisions. Academics considered that a bias may operate against upholding advance decisions refusing life-sustaining treatment 1. It’s commonly felt that judges usually give decisions favouring preservation of life and making advance decisions invalid on various grounds. Recent case-law indicates that a high level of specificity is required for advance refusals of life-sustaining treatment and, in some capacity must be demonstrated at the time of making the decision. This essay will argue the legal back ground of the advance decisions and relevant case law. There are suggestions that advance care planning (ACP) instead of advance decisions (ADRT) may be more helpful when it comes to the practice of law on ground 2.

The Community Mental Health Act of 1963, was the first federal law that inspired community-based mental health care, and it ignited the transformation of the public mental health system (Young Minds Advocacy, 2016). Other names of the Act are Mental Retardation and Community Mental Health Centers Construction Act of 1963. It was the beginning of the Deinstitutionalized movement in mental health treatment options for children, youth, and adults (National Council for Behavioral Health (NCBH), 2015). States received money from grants, from the Community Mental Health Act for the construction of these mental health centers. Initially, the intention of the grant program was to provide 1500 mental health centers nationally (Young Minds

“The Canadian Mental Health Association estimates that 1 in 5 Canadians will develop a mental illness at some time in their lives.” Mental illness is defined as a mental pattern that causes an impaired ability to function normally in ordinary life. Mental illnesses can affect persons of any age, race, religion, or income and are not the result of personal weakness, lack of character or poor upbringing. A number of factors can contribute to whether an individual will develop a mental illness, with these factors being present individually or in multiples. A number of factors have been identified that contribute towards initiating mental illness, but no individual factor has been definitively identified as ‘the’ factor that causes a mental illness. Symptoms of mental illness can range from mild to severe and are classified into two main categories as being either organic disorders or functional disorders. Organic disorders cause a decrease in the mental function of the brain due to a medical disease; while functional disorders cause a derangement of the mind. The type and severity of the disorder determines if it will be short-term and treatable or if it will be permanent or degenerative and untreatable. There are a variety of community and medical services available to assist those who are affected by mental illness. These services are available on an in-patient or out-patient basis depending on the level of severity, with the general trend towards

The introduction of Community Treatment Orders (CTO) has raised much debate around the issue of whether this is an ethical practice or not. This debate calls for a number of questions to be answered. For starters, can unethical practice be justified if it is for the greater good? More specifically, should the elimination of individuals’ rights be accepted if success is to be achieved from these programs. In order to gain insight into answering these questions, Community Treatment Orders need to be defined first. According to the “Mental Health Act”, a Community Treatment Order sets out terms under which a person must accept psychiatric drugs, therapy, and other services while living in the community (Mental Health Act 2007). CTO’s include

Mental Health coverage prior to the Affordable Care Act was far to none. With about nearly one-third of currently covered individuals having no coverage for substance abuse disorder services and approximately 20% having no coverage for mental health services. Services such as outpatient therapy visits, impatient crisis intervention and stabilization were among many that were not offered. Since the Affordable Health Care Act has been passed more individuals are able to afford health insurance that were once uninsured. It has helped many individuals in being able to obtain medical services that were once inaccessible.

The Mental Health Services Act is a monumental proposition that has helped many people for more than a decade. In California alone, close to 1.2 million adults and around 422,000 children live with a serious mental illness (State 2010). Without the proper treatment, suicide is the leading cause of death for a person battling an untreated mental illness (State 2010). With over thirteen billion dollars raised so far, MHSA has been the root of funding for mental health in California (Williams 2015). MHSA is still a work in progress. The act is nowhere near perfect, as a recent audit has shown, but it is certainly a step in the right direction.

Most people with mental illness can and do seek out treatment for their condition. The Mental Health Act is concerned with the small number of persons who cannot or who do not seek out treatment.

Individuals with a mental illness enter a mental health court as it reduces the number of clients with mental illnesses in the criminal justice system, reduces stigma and stereotypical judgement in court, and reduces the number of clients with mental illnesses in prisons and jails. Although the judge does sentence the client, the client does still retain rights: The right to refuse treatments, the right to proper care and documentation, the right to be informed of all available medical treatments, and most importantly, the right to be treated with dignity as a human being. The court demonstrated that the client’s rights were addressed by offering the client the opportunity to voice his concerns, and by acknowledging his views on his condition. Even though the client did not think he needed help, the nurse and case manager were concerned about his hallucination, eating patterns, and lack of stability. They did not believe that an outpatient setting would work for this client as he was not stable, did not have clear insight, and retained a lack of resources. Barrier to care, for the mental health in general, include: lack of resource, knowledge deficits, stigma, financial barriers, and lack of mental health care professionals. Overall, this experience offered me to opportunity to perceive how a Mental Health Court functions and differs from the traditional court room, in relation to client goals,

This essay will discuss issues that nurses have to consider when caring for a person that either lacks or have compromised capacity. At the same time, the author will explain important terminology in the essay such as the meaning of consent, capacity, best interest, Deprivation of liberty, advanced decisions, risk assessment, including several examples from experience during placement

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.

Policy analysis of mental health care under the ACA as well as description of how mental health care/service are organized under the ACA from federal to local levels.

The United States has never had an official federal-centered approach for mental health care facilities, entrusting its responsibility to the states throughout the history. The earliest initiatives in this field took place in the 18th century, when Virginia built its first asylum and Pennsylvania Hospital reserved its basement to house individuals with mental disorders (Sundararaman, 2009). During the 19th century, other services were built, but their overall lack of quality was alarming. Even then, researchers and professionals in the mental health field attempted to implement the principles of the so-called public health, focusing on prevention and early intervention, but the funds were in the hands of the local governments, which prevented significant advances in this direction.

Every day, schizophrenia not only disrupts the lives of hundreds of thousands of Canadians, but it also places a significant strain on our society. This disorder affects approximately 300,000 Canadians, and places a burden on not only the patient, but their families, the clinicians and other health care professionals. Deinstitutionalization, importance on legal rights, ineffective policy, and community based treatment all contribute to the way services for schizophrenia are delivered in Canada. Symptoms of Schizophrenia can affect daily functions of which people rely on. These symptoms can vary in severity which creates obstacles such as being able to maintain employment, relationships, and engage in social network; which results in a lower standard of living among these individuals.

Policies have an important role in regulating and shaping the values in a society. The issues related to mental health are not only considered as personal but also affecting the relationships with significant others. The stigma and discrimination faced by people with mental health can be traced to the lack of legislation and protection of rights (Rodriguez del Barrio et al., 2014). The policy makers in mental health have a challenging task to protect the rights of individuals as well as the public (Swigger & Heinmiller, 2014). Therefore, it is essential to analyse the current mental health policies. In Canada, provinces adopt their own Mental Health Acts (MHA) to implement mental health services. As of January 15, 2016, there are 13 mental health acts in Canada (Gray, Hastings, Love, & O’Reilly, 2016). The key elements, despite the differences in laws, are “(1) involuntary admission criteria, (2) the right to refuse treatment, and (3) who has the authority to authorize treatment” (Browne, 2010). The current act in Ontario is Mental Health Act, 1990.

Mental health is defined as an individual’s optimal care in managing the stress of everyday life, through their own unique approach and can efficiently and successfully make vital contribution within the community they live in (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC, 2013). Since a break in a person’s optimal mental state affects not only the individual but society, it is important to understand what it means to have a break in one’s state of mental health and the different categories that is associated with mental illness. Focus will also be paid to why there is a need for the reformation of the mental health act in Canada; the social determinants that is associated with mental health and their contribution to society’s health’s. Finally, focus also need to be placed on how mental health is being promoted to society the stigma generally associated with it.