Article Text
Clinical ethics
“Idiots, infants, and the insane”: mental illness and legal incompetence
Abstract
Prior to the second world war, most persons confined in insane asylums were regarded as legally incompetent and had guardians appointed for them. Today, most persons confined in mental hospitals (or treated involuntarily, committed to outpatient treatment) are, in law, competent; nevertheless, in fact, they are treated as if they were incompetent. Should the goal of mental health policy be providing better psychiatric services to more and more people, or the reduction and ultimate elimination of the number of persons in the population treated as mentally ill?
- conflict between mental patient and psychiatrist
- psychiatric reform
- involuntary psychiatric intervention
- legal incompetence
- mental illness
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Footnotes
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Psychiatry and the control of dangerousness: on the apotropaic function of the term “mental illness”
- The mental health of China and Pakistan, mental health laws and COVID-19 mental health policies: a comparative review
- The danger of dangerousness: why we must remove the dangerousness criterion from our mental health acts
- Compulsory medical intervention versus external constraint in pandemic control
- Has the Mental Health Act had its day?
- Brain injury and deprivation of liberty on neurosciences wards: ‘a gilded cage is still a cage’
- Dangerousness, mental disorder, and responsibility
- Stimulating brains, altering minds
- Mental illness: psychiatry's phlogiston
- ‘The few cubic centimetres inside your skull’: a neurological reading of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four