header-logo header-logo

15 December 2023 / Laura Davidson
Issue: 8053 / Categories: Features , Mental health
printer mail-detail

The mental health paradigm

151428
Laura Davidson asks if new UN guidance could topple compulsory detention & enforced medical treatment
  • Covers guidance issued by the World Health Organisation and the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights.
  • Suggests it may help end practices of coercion and compulsory treatment, and could have a stronger impact than international human rights law.

A quarter of a century ago, the UK ratified the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD). It prohibits discrimination, including against those with ‘mental… [or] intellectual impairments’ (Art 1). Despite being binding, global compliance remains patchy. However, all psychiatric coercion—compulsory hospitalisation, physical and chemical restraint, seclusion and segregation—is discriminatory and hence unlawful.

The European Court of Human Rights deems psychiatric force lawful if necessary and proportionate, the least restrictive option and a last resort. The UK’s 40-year-old Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA 1983) permits coercion to protect someone’s health or safety, or others (s 2(2) and s 3(2)). Restraint (which may cause death) and seclusion (a recognised form of torture)

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Bellevue Law—Lianne Craig

Workplace law firm expands commercial disputes team with senior consultant hire

EIP—Rob Barker

EIP—Rob Barker

IP firm promotes patent attorney to partner

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Muckle LLP—Ryan Butler

Banking and restructuring team bolstered by insolvency specialist

NEWS
A High Court ruling involving the Longleat estate has exposed the fault line between modern family building and historic trust drafting. Writing in NLJ this week, Charlotte Coyle, director and family law expert at Freeths, examines Cator v Thynn [2026] EWHC 209 (Ch), where trustees sought approval to modernise trusts that retain pre-1970 definitions of ‘child’, ‘grandchild’ and ‘issue’
Fresh proposals to criminalise ‘nudification’ apps, prioritise cyberflashing and non-consensual intimate images, and even ban under-16s from social media have reignited debate over whether the Online Safety Act 2023 (OSA 2023) is fit for purpose. Writing in NLJ this week, Alexander Brown, head of technology, media and telecommunications, and Alexandra Webster, managing associate, Simmons & Simmons, caution against reactive law-making that could undermine the Act’s ‘risk-based and outcomes-focused’ design
Recent allegations surrounding Peter Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor have reignited scrutiny of the ancient common law offence of misconduct in public office. Writing in NLJ this week, Simon Parsons, teaching fellow at Bath Spa University, asks whether their conduct could clear a notoriously high legal hurdle
A landmark ruling has reshaped child clinical negligence claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Jodi Newton, head of birth and paediatric negligence at Osbornes Law, explains how the Supreme Court in CCC v Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust [2026] UKSC 5 has overturned Croke v Wiseman, ending the long-standing bar on children recovering ‘lost years’ earnings
A Court of Appeal ruling has drawn a firm line under party autonomy in arbitration. Writing in NLJ this week, Masood Ahmed, associate professor at the University of Leicester, analyses Gluck v Endzweig [2026] EWCA Civ 145, where a clause allowing arbitrators to amend an award ‘at any time’ was held incompatible with the Arbitration Act 1996
back-to-top-scroll