Australian and Canadian Mental Health Acts Compared

Abstract

The paper concludes that there are significant philosophical differences regarding the purpose of involuntary admission between Australian and some Canadian jurisdictions where treatment refusal is possible. Australian mental health Acts have a relatively stronger 'treatment' focus than some Canadian Acts. The apparently stronger 'rights' focus of some Canadian laws (such as the permission of treatment refusal) can paradoxically result in a denial of liberty rights. The way in which the relevant legislation is shaped in both countries will increasingly be affected by international trends towards the rights of individuals with disabilities.

Reducing all-cause mortality among patients with psychiatric disorders: a population-based study

“…These orders are used across both Canada and Australia, are of similar duration in both countries, and are clinician-initiated rather than court-ordered (in contrast to the United States). 10,11 Unlike in Canada, patients in Australia can be given community treatment orders without having been previously admitted to hospital. In practice, patients in both countries spend similar amounts of time in hospital before being given a community treatment order.…”

“…Most evaluations of community treatment orders have been restricted to 1 or 2 years of follow-up, because it may be difficult to attribute any effect to the intervention beyond that period. 11,12 However, 2 years allows for sufficient time to detect an effect on mortality, particularly for chronic physical conditions.…”

“…Community treatment orders require a person with a mental illness or disorder to follow a treatment plan, including adherence to any medications and psychiatric outpatient visits. 11 Community treatment orders set out the terms under which a person must accept medication, therapy, rehabilitation and other services while living in the community. If a person breaches a community treatment order, the person may be taken to a mental health facility and given appropriate treatment, including medication.…”

Five years after implementation: A review of the Irish Mental Health Act 2001

“…Of particular note to Ireland, legislation in England and Wales has diverged from this move toward increased patient autonomy (Fistein et al, 2009). Certain jurisdictions, such as Australian jurisdictions, have emphasised patient rights to a more limited extent, placing more emphasis on treatment (Gray, McSherry, O'Reilly, & Weller, 2010). The Irish MHA 2001 appears to have followed trends observed in Commonwealth nations, particularly with relatively broad diagnostic criteria, treatment mandated for health as well as safety and regular reviews of treatment orders.…”

Involuntary admission and treatment of patients with mental disorder

“…In [15] . In the USA there is a strong tendency to replace "need for treatment" with a "dangerousness criterion".…”