Article Text
Abstract
The House of Lords in F v West Berkshire Health Authority [1989] considered the lawfulness of providing care and treatment for a mentally incapacitated adult. They did not, however, directly consider the use of restraint to enable the provision of care in the face of resistance from the patient. The law has since had good cause to give consideration to this important issue. This paper establishes the present law in the context of using restraint to deliver care. Although the legal principles established have derived from what might be considered to be “hard cases”, life-and-death cases, they apply to all aspects of routine medical, dental and nursing care. Further, the paper considers the recent government proposals and the effect those proposals may have on the routine care of such patients.
- Law
- mental incapacity - adults
- statutory restraint
- common law restraint
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
-
Andrew M Bridgman, BDS, LLB(Hons), MA, is a Clinical Teacher and Lecturer for Law and Ethics in Dentistry, Turner Dental School, University of Manchester.
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- How, and when, can I restrain a patient?
- Safety seat and seat belt use among child motor vehicle occupants, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
- Caesarean section: a treatment for mental disorder? Tameside&Glossop Acute Services Unit v CH (a patient) [1996] 1 FLR 762
- Medical management of acute severe anorexia nervosa
- Booster seat laws and child fatalities: a case–control study
- Restraint in somatic healthcare: how should it be regulated?
- Management of distressing procedures in children and young people: time to adhere to the guidelines
- Pacing extremely old patients: who decides—the doctor, the patient, or the relatives?
- Commentary: A decision that stretches the law too far
- Factors associated with the decision to prescribe and administer antipsychotics for older people with delirium: a qualitative descriptive study