Should psychiatrists protect the public?

doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7386.406

BMJ 2003;326:406-407 ( 22 February )

Editorials

Should psychiatrists protect the public?

A new risk reduction strategy, supporting criminal justice, could be effective

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

As conservative members of the middle classes, most psychiatrists probably support recent criminal legislation designed toimprove public protection by introducing tighter controls on highrisk offenders. Psychiatrists have always contributed to publicprotection by detaining dangerous patients. Yet proposed mentalhealth legislation emphasising public protection has provokedan outcry.¹ The government is accused of circumventing humanrights legislation by concealing preventive detention in medicaldisguise, with establishment figures in forensic psychiatry evenurging withdrawal from psychiatry's already limited participationin public protection.^2-4 The Royal College of Psychiatrists hasstated unequivocally that the only rationale for psychiatric interventionis for the benefit of patients' health and public protection issecondary. ⁵ The rhetoric should now cool while psychiatrydetermines its role in an alternative public protectionframework.

The debate's moral focus has largely neglected two pragmatic questions. Firstly, is the health service equipped to take thelead in public protection? Secondly, . . . [Full text of this article]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us Add to Digg

Digg

StumbleUpon Add to Technorati

Technorati What's this?

Relevant Articles

New mental health legislation: John Crichton and Rajan Darjee
BMJ 2007 334: 596-597. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Reforming mental health law in England and Wales: Nigel Eastman
BMJ 2006 332: 737-738. [Extract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This article has been cited by other articles:

Khalifa, N., Taylor, M. H. (2008). Can we harmonise forensic psychiatry across Europe?. Psychiatr. Bull. 32: 74-74 [Full text]
Crichton, J., Darjee, R. (2007). New mental health legislation. BMJ 334: 596-597 [Full text]
Eastman, N. (2006). Can there be true partnership between clinicians and the Home Office?: INVITED COMMENTARY ON ... THE HOME OFFICE MENTAL HEALTH UNIT. Adv. Psychiatr. Treat. 12: 459-461 [Abstract] [Full text]
Eastman, N. (2006). Reforming mental health law in England and Wales.. BMJ 332: 737-738 [Full text]
Canvin, K, Bartlett, A, Pinfold, V (2005). Acceptability of compulsory powers in the community: the ethical considerations of mental health service users on Supervised Discharge and Guardianship. J. Med. Ethics 31: 457-462 [Abstract] [Full text]
Dobson, R. (2003). Mental health bill will be subject to pre-legislative scrutiny. BMJ 327: 1304-1304 [Full text]
Feeney, A. (2003). Dangerous severe personality disorder. Adv. Psychiatr. Treat. 9: 349-358 [Abstract] [Full text]

Rapid Responses:

Read all Rapid Responses

Psychiatrists as agents of public protection: Prabhat K Mahapatra
bmj.com, 21 Feb 2003 [Full text]
D(r)aft Mental Health Bill: Chris Manning
bmj.com, 22 Feb 2003 [Full text]
Psychopathy and free will: Arthur Rifkin, MD, et al.
bmj.com, 24 Feb 2003 [Full text]
Psychiatrists and preventative detention: Stuart M White
bmj.com, 24 Feb 2003 [Full text]
He who pays the Piper: Sameer P. Sarkar, MD
bmj.com, 25 Feb 2003 [Full text]
No Mention of Child Abuse: Mark S. Kern
bmj.com, 26 Feb 2003 [Full text]
Should Psychiatrists potect the public?: S.P. Sashidharan
bmj.com, 18 Mar 2003 [Full text]