Protecting rights in mental health law
The relationship between the courts and mental health tribunals
in Ethical and legal debates in Irish healthcare
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

Ireland’s Mental Health Act 2001 requires that all involuntary admissions for mental disorder be reviewed within twenty-one days by a three-person Mental Health Tribunal. This chapter focuses on key written judgments of the High Court and Supreme Court reviewing decisions of Mental Health Tribunal. Despite some statements to the contrary, the general picture which emerges is that the courts have not engaged in robust supervision of mental health tribunals. Instead, the general tenor of the case-law has been to endorse decisions of tribunals to affirm detentions, and to limit access to the courts to the most extreme violations of procedural rights. The chapter argues that this is a disappointing outcome, in light of the supposed rights-based focus of the Mental Health Act 2001.

INFORMATION
TABLE OF CONTENTS
METRICS

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 28 7 0
Full Text Views 19 11 0
PDF Downloads 10 4 0
RELATED CONTENT