Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T07:33:34.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Committal law in Ireland

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2014

Patrick Gibbons  and
David Walshe
Patrick Gibbons
Affiliation:
Old Age Psychiatry, James Connolly Memorial Hospital, Blanchardstown, Dublin 15
David Walshe
Affiliation:
Eastern Health Board Rotation, St. Loman's Hospital, Palmerstown, Dublin 20
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Legislation governing committal practice has been a cause of controversy worldwide. A review of the relevant literature highlights the ongoing debate between those advocating broadly based ‘need for treatment’ criteria as a basis for committal (‘Parens Patriae’), and those who advocate more narrowly defined criteria requiring evidence of ‘dangerousness’ to validate committal. Current committal law in Ireland follows the ‘Parens Patriae’ tradition. However the recently published Green Paper on Mental Health points out that the current law is not compatible with international obligations, making reform inevitable. The Green Paper suggests various alterations in relation to committal criteria and procedures, with the retention of both ‘need for treatment’ as well as ‘dangerousness’ as valid committal criteria. These changes appear to be compatible with the ‘Stone criteria’ adopted as a model committal law by the American Psychiatric Association.

Keywords

Committal‘Parens Patriae’‘Dangerousness’Civil rights; Legislative reform; Safeguards
Type
Perspectives
Information
Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine , Volume 10 , Issue 2 , June 1993 , pp. 104 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Hoge, SK, Sachs, G, Appelbaum, PS, Greer, A, Gordon, C. Limitations on psychiatrists' discretionary civil commitment authority by the Stone and dangerousness criteria. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 764–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Peszke, MA. Is dangerousness an issue for psychiatrists in emergency commitment? Am J Psychiatry 1975; 132: 825–9.Google Scholar
3.Stone, AA. Comment. Am J Psychiatry 1975; 132: 829–31.Google ScholarPubMed
4.Yesavage, JA, Werner, PD, Becker, J, Mills, MJ. Short-term civil commitment and the violent person. Am J Psychiatry 1972; 139 (9): 1145–9.Google Scholar
5.Urmer, A. Implications of California's new mental health law. Am J Psychiatry 1975; 132 (3): 251–4.Google ScholarPubMed
6. O'Connor Vs Donaldson, 95 U.S. Supreme Court 2486 (1975).Google Scholar
7.Hasebe, T, McRae, J. A ten-year study of civil commitment in Washington State. Hosp Community Psychiatry 1987; 38: 983–7.Google ScholarPubMed
8.Page, S. The relevance of commitment ‘criteria’. Can J Psychiatry 1980; 25: 646–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Appelbaum, PS. The new preventive detention: psychiatry's problematic responsibility for the control of violence. Am J Psychiatry 1988; 145: 779–85.Google ScholarPubMed
10.Wanck, B. Two decades of involuntary hospitalization. Am J Psychiatry 1984; 141: 33–8.Google ScholarPubMed
11.Rofman, ES, Askinazi, C, Fant, E. The prediction of dangerous behavior in emergency civil commitment. Am J Psychiatry 1980; 137: 1061–4.Google Scholar
12.Stone, AA. Recent mental health litigation: a critical perspective. Am J Psychiatry 1977; 134: 273–9.Google ScholarPubMed
13.Pierce, GL, Durham, ML, Fisher, WH. The impact of public policy on admissions to state mental hospitals. J Health Polit Policy Law 1986; 11: 41–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Rubin, LC, Mills, MJ. Behavioural precipitants to civil commitment. Am J Psychiatry 1983; 140: 603–5.Google ScholarPubMed
15.Cocozza, JJ, Steadman, HJ. Some refinements in the measurement and prediction of dangerous behavior. Am J Psychiatry 1974; 131: 1012–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.McNeil, DE, Binder, RL. Predictive validity of judgements of dangerousness in emergency civil commitment. Am J Psychiatry 1987; 144: 197–200.Google Scholar
17.Segal, SP, Watson, MA, Goldfinger, SM, Averbruck, DS. Civil commitment in the psychiatric emergency room I: the assessment of dangerousness by emergency room clinicians. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 748–52.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
18.Segal, SP, Watson, MA, Goldfinger, SM, Averbruck, DS. Civil commitment in the Psychiatric emergency room II: mental disorder indicators and three dangerousness criteria. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 753–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
19.Segal, SP, Watson, MA, Goldfinger, SM, Averbruck, DS. Civil commitment in the psychiatric emergency room III: disposition as a function of mental disorder and dangerousness indicators. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 759–63.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
20.Mills, ML. The relationship between perceived dangerousness and mental illness. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1988; 45: 770–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21.Weir, H, Webb, M. Procedures for involuntary hospitalization for mental illness and addiction. Journal of the Irish Medical Association 1980; 73; 3: 112–6.Google Scholar
22.Gibbons, P, Walshe, D, Dillon, J. Commital procedures in Ireland: a study of the role of dangerousness in determining commital practice. Ir Med J 1992; 85: 91–3.Google Scholar
23.Bagby, RM, Thompson, JS, Dickens, SE, Nohara, M. Decision making in psychiatric civil commitment: an experimental analysis. Am J Psychiatry 1991; 148: 28–33.Google ScholarPubMed
24.Schwartz, HI, Appelbaum, PS, Kaplan, R. Clinical judgements in the decision to commit: psychiatric discretion and the law. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1984; 41: 811–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
25.Appelbaum, PS, Hamm, RM. Decision to seek commitment: decision making in a legal context. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1982; 39: 447–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
26.McCready, J, Merskey, DM. On the recording of mental illness for civil commitment. Can J Psychiatry 1982; 27: 140–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Roth, LH. A commitment law for patients, doctors and lawyers. Am J Psychiatry 1979; 13: 1121–6.Google Scholar
28.Monahan, J, Ruggiero, M, Friedlander, HD. Stone-Roth model of civil commitment and the California dangerousness standard. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1982; 39: 1267–71.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed