Citation

Freckelton I. Psychiatry Psychol. Law. 2003; 10(2): 390-396.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2003, Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1375/pplt.2003.10.2.390

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The author argues that fundamental ideological divergence in civil commitment decision-making can be identified by reference to a series of specific points of reference: cases where patients have recently self-harmed, cases where patients have harmed others, personality disorder cases, bipolar affective disorder cases, eating disorder cases and comorbidity cases. He contends that the classification of decision-making at such points as "paternalist" or "civil libertarian" is simplistic but, nonetheless, has a utility in identifying fundamental orientations on the part of clinical and review body decision-makers as well as for facilitating self-aware evaluation of decision-maker temptations and biases. © 2003 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Language: en