The Australasian Approach to Defining Mental Disorder in a Mental Health Act
|dc.identifier.citation||2018, ‘The Australasian approach to defining mental disorder in a Mental Health Act’, J Dawson, 26 Medical Law Review 610-632 (England).||en_NZ|
|dc.description.abstract||How should the mental element be defined in the legal standards governing a person’s ‘sectioning’ or civil commitment under the Mental Health Act (MHA)? This article considers how this mental element is defined in many MHAs in Australasia: that is, via a statutory list of disorders of mental function said to ‘characterise’ the necessary state of mind. The author assesses the assumptions that lie behind the adoption of this approach and discusses the views of several English law reform committees that have explored how the mental element should be defined. The article concludes that, while the Australasian approach does not avoid the need for further interpretation of the terms used to describe disorders of mental function in the statutory list, it better for the legislation to use such a definition than to provide no definition at all.||en_NZ|
|dc.publisher||Oxford University Press||en_NZ|
|dc.relation.ispartof||Medical Law Review||en_NZ|
|dc.title||The Australasian Approach to Defining Mental Disorder in a Mental Health Act||en_NZ|
|otago.school||University of Otago Faculty of Law||en_NZ|
Files in this item
There are no files associated with this item.
This item is not available in full-text via OUR Archive.
If you are the author of this item, please contact us if you wish to discuss making the full text publicly available.