Putting mental health into mental health law

This article critiques the traditional doctrinal approach to mental health law and compares the traditional approach with a new, interdisciplinary approach known as therapeutic jurisprudence. Therapeutic jurisprudence views the law itself as a potential therapeutic agent. Examples are given of how legal rules, procedures, and the roles of legal actors may produce therapeutic or antitherapeutic results and of how the law may improve therapeutic outcomes without sacrificing the interests of justice.     

Health law and mental health law courses in US medical schools

Results of a recent survey of all 127 medical schools in the United States indicate that about two fifths of medical schools offer a separate course that focuses on topics in medicine and law and a number of medical schools integrate health law topics into other courses. Presumably reflecting concern over temporary medical malpractice litigation, most health law courses include informed consent, medical malpractice, privileged/confidential information, and patients' rights. In contrast, schools that offer a course on psychiatry and law are clearly in a minority. It is elective at all but two of the 13 schools with such a course. Although the hours allotted and the format of these courses vary greatly, courses typically cover most of the topics listed on the questionnaire. Most of the courses are led or co-led by a member of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law. Information from two additional surveys suggests two related factors that may influence a medical school to present a separate course on health law. Medical licensing boards were surveyed to determine which states require physicians to be examined on health law. In two states that require physicians to pass a separate medical jurisprudence examination for licensure, all four-year medical schools offer a course on health law for medical students. Medical malpractice companies providing coverage in all 50 states and the District of Columbia were surveyed to determine which states have the highest claim rates. The claim rate per 1,000 physicians insured per year was significantly greater in states with health law courses than was the rate in states without such courses.     

Justice and equality in mental health law: the European experience

This is the text of a lecture delivered at the World Conference of the International Academy of Law and Mental Health in Sydney in September 2003 on the occasion of the award to the author of the Prix Philippe Pinel. Its theme is the potential of the European Convention on Human Rights to secure the human rights of people with mental disorders and disabilities, viewed in the context of the legislation on mental health and mental incapacity in England and Wales. Its conclusion is that the Convention is better at protecting them from unwanted or unnecessary treatment and care than it is at securing for them equal access to the treatment and care they want or need. The lecture has been updated to reflect developments in the United Kingdom since 2003.     

Comparing law reviews for their amenability to articles addressing mental health issues

Continuing emphasis has been given to the importance of social scientists bringing empirical research to the attention of legal decision makers. Law reviews have been identified as a particularly useful means for accomplishing this dissemination. The following study is an attempt to determine whether particular law reviews are more amenable to publishing articles on one aspect of the law where considerable social science research has been conducted, namely, mental health law. A LEXIS search for articles addressing mental health issues and published over a 3-year period by 49 national, generalscope law reviews was conducted. These journals showed a general willingness to publish mentalhealth-related articles. This willingness was present in almost all journals, even if somewhat limited. However, a specialized journal focusing on health issues appeared considerably more amenable to these articles than the other journals. For the most part, the other journals were relatively similar in their willingness to publish mental-health-related articles, although across the range of journals the differences in this willingness became pronounced. Based on the results of this study, a strategy is suggested for social scientists wishing to publish their research in law reviews.     

Why community compulsion became the solution - Reforming mental health law in Sweden

The aim of this article is to understand how compulsory community care (CCC) has become a solution in mental health policy in so many different legal and social contexts during the last 20 years. The recent introduction of CCC in Sweden is used as a case in point, which is then contrasted against the processes in Norway, England/Wales and New York State.In Sweden, the issue of CCC was initiated following high-profile acts of violence. Contrary to several other states, there was agreement about the (lack of) evidence about its effectiveness. Rather than focusing on dangerousness, the government proposal about CCC was framed within an ideology of integrating the disabled. The new legislation allowed for a broad range of measures to control patients at the same time as it was presented as a means to protect positive rights for patients. Compared to previous legislation in Sweden, the scope of social control has remained largely the same, although the rationale has changed — from medical treatment via community treatment and rehabilitation, to reducing the risk of violence, and then shifting back to rehabilitation in the community.The Swedish approach to CCC is similar to Norway, while New York and England/Wales have followed different routes. Differences in ideology, social control and rights orientations can be understood with reference to the general welfare and care regimes that characterize the four states.     

The past, present and future of mental health law: a therapeutic jurisprudence analysis

This article uses a therapeutic jurisprudence perspective to review the evolution of mental health law in the Western world by examining developments at various stages in history, in particular the 20th century. It suggests that one of the major challenges for the future, from a therapeutic jurisprudence perspective, will be to help minimise the stigma, prejudice and discrimination associated with mental health law. The article concludes with the suggestion that the question of whether mental health law itself, because it contributes to discrimination against mentally disordered people, may be anti-therapeutic requires more investigation and consideration.     

The invention of health law

By default, the courts are inventing health law. The law governing the American health system arises from an unruly mix of statutes, regulations, and judge-crafted doctrines conceived, in the main, without medical care in mind. Courts are ill-equipped to put order to this chaos, and until recently they have been disinclined to try. But political gridlock and popular ire over managed care have pushed them into the breach, and the Supreme Court has become a proactive health policy player. How might judges make sense of health law's disparate doctrinal standards? Scholars from diverse ideological starting points have converged toward a single answer: the law should look to deploy medical resources in a systematically rational manner, so as to maximize the benefits that every dollar buys. This answer bases the orderly development of health care law upon our ability to reach stable understandings, in myriad circumstances, of what welfare maximization requires. In this Article, I contend that this goal is not achievable. Scientific ignorance, cognitive limitations, and normative disagreements yield shifting, incomplete, and contradictory understandings of social welfare in the health sphere. The chaotic state of health care law today reflects this unruliness. In making systemic welfare maximization the lodestar for health law, we risk falling so far short of aspirations for reasoned decision making as to invite disillusion about the possibilities for any sort of rationality in this field. Accordingly, I urge that we define health law's aims more modestly, based on acknowledgement that its rationality is discontinuous across substantive contexts and changeable with time. This concession to human limits, I argue, opens the way to health policy that mediates wisely between our desire for public action to maximize the well being of the many and our intimate wishes to be treated noninstrumentally, as separate ends. I conclude with an effort to identify the goals of health law, so constructed, should pursue and to suggest how a strategy of accommodation among these goals might apply to a variety of legal controversies.     

Alaska public health law reform

The Turning Point Model State Public Health Act (Turning Point Act), published in September 2003, provides a comprehensive template for states seeking public health law modernization. This case study examines the political and policy efforts undertaken in Alaska following the development of the Turning Point Act. It is the first in a series of case studies to assess states' consideration of the Turning Point Act for the purpose of public health law reform. Through a comparative analysis of these case studies and ongoing legislative tracking in all fifty states, researchers can assess (1) how states codify the Turning Point Act into state law and (2) how these modernized state laws influence or change public health practice, leading to improved health outcomes.     

Human rights and health law

Important statutory and common law developments are changing the landscape of health law in Australia. Human rights considerations are formally included amongst the factors to be applied in the interpretation of statutory provisions and evaluating the lawfulness of actions on the part of government instrumentalities. The Human Rights Act 2004 (ACT) and the Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Vic) create limited bills of rights at State/Territory level in two Australian jurisdictions. Although neither is entrenched, they have the potential to make it more difficult for government to promulgate laws that are inconsistent with human rights, as defined. They will have important repercussions for the evolution of health law in these jurisdictions. The decision of Royal Women's Hospital v Medical Practitioners Board (Vic) [2006] VSCA 85 by the Victorian Court of Appeal has also provided a legitimation for parties to incorporate human rights perspectives in submissions about the interpretation of statutory provisions where health rights are in conflict.