To detain or not to detain: A question of public duty?

Psychiatry, Psychology and Law

Volumn 16, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 288-302

  Rangarajan, Shrikkanth ^a   McSherry, Bernadette ^b  

^a ALFRED HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Duty of care; Duty to detain; Mental illness; Negligence; Psychiatrists

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449334421     PISSN: 13218719     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/13218710902852867     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Savage v South Essex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust [2008] 1 WLR 1667 (CA); Kirkland-Veenstra v Stuart (2008) Aust Torts Reports, paras 81-936 (duty of police to detain a psychiatrically unwell man for assessment);
2. I Freckelton, 'Liability for Failure by Police to Detain Potentially Suicidal and Dangerous Persons' (2008) 15(2) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 175.
3. Home Office v Dorset Yacht Company Ltd [1970] AC 1004 (HL); Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1989] AC 53 (HL); Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep (Medical) 351 (EWCACiv); Kirkland-Veenstra v Stuart (2008) Aust Torts Reports paras 81-936; Smith v Jones (1999) 132 CCC (3d) 225 (Supreme Court of Canada), discussed in BMcSherry, 'Breaching Confidentiality in the Public Interest: Guidance from Canada?' (2000) 19(3)Monash Bioethics Review 28.
4. I Freckelton, 'Liability of Psychiatrists for Failure to Certify' (2003) 10(2) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 397; R Scott, 'Liability of Mental Health Services for Failing to Admit or Detain a Patient with a Mental Illness" (2006) 13(1) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 49.
5. Chapman v Hearse (1961) 106 CLR 112 (High Court of Australia); F v R (1983) 33 SASR189; Bolamv FriernHospitalManagement Committee (1957) 1WLR 583 (QB).
6. This article will focus on the liability of the doctor rather than the vicarious liability of the employer health service.
7. These cases will be discussed later in the article when considering proximity between plaintiff and defendant.
8. Chapman v Hearse (1961) 106 CLR 112 (High Court of Australia); F v R (1983) 33 SASR189; Bolamv FriernHospitalManagement Committee (1957) 1WLR 583 (QB). 8. Ellis v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2007] 1 NZLR 196, 213.
9. In this case, the hospital is the defendant, rather than the psychiatrist, which does not alter considerations of a duty of care owed by a psychiatrist if he or she were named as defendant.
10. In both cases the hospital is the defendant rather than the psychiatrist, which does not alter considerations of a duty of care owed by the psychiatrists if they were named as defendant.
11. Hill v Chief Constable of West Yorkshire [1988] QB 60; Brooks vMetropolitan Police Commissioner [2005] 2 All ER 489 (HL).
12. For a detailed case note see Freckelton (n 1).This case is currently subject to an appeal to the High Court of Australia.
13. Kirkland-Veenstra v Stuart (2008) Aust Torts Reports paras 81-936, [90] (Warren CJ).
14. In the majority of cases discussed, for financial reasons the plaintiffs have preferred to sue the hospital vicariously rather than the individual doctor.
15. Ellis v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2007] 1 NZLR 196, 206-207 (Potter J).
16. Ellis v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2007] 1 NZLR 196, 228 (Potter J).
17. Ellis v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2007] 1 NZLR 196, 228 (Potter J).
18. Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep (Medical) 351 (EWCACiv).
19. For example, Mental Health (Care and Treatment) Act 1994 (ACT), s 41(1)(c); Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW), ss 14(1)(b), 15(b), 19 and 84; Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 (NSW), s 74(b) (in relation to forensic and correctional patients, not yet commenced); Mental Health and Related Services Act (NT), s 8(b) (principles for performance of functions); Mental Health Act 2000 (Qld), s 9(a) (principles for performance of functions), Sch 2 (Dictionary definition of "less restrictive") and s 288(3)(c) (in relation to forensic patients); Mental Health Act 1993 (SA) ss 12(1)(c), 13(1)(b), 18, 19(2)(a), 20(1)(c) and 22(2)(a); Mental Health Act 1996 (Tas), generally see ss 24(b) and (c) and s 32(2)(c), and in relation to forensic patients see ss 72H(2)(B), 72I(4)(c) and 72J(1)(c); Mental Health Act 1986 (Vic), s 8(1)(c); Mental Health Act 1996 (WA), ss 26(1)(b)(i), 109, 113(1)(b) and 114; Mental Health (Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 1992 (NZ), s 62(c) (in relation to urgent treatment); and Mental Health Act 1983 (UK), s 3(2)(c).
20. P Bean, Mental Disorder and Legal Control (CUP, Cambridge 1986) 42;
21. F Trindade, The Law of Torts in Australia (4th edn OUP, South Melbourne 2007) 609.
22. Crimmins v Stevedoring Industry Finance Committee (1999) 200 CLR 1, 39 (McHugh J).
23. Road Safety Act 1986 (Vic).
24. Harvey and Another v PD (2004) 59 NSWLR 639.
25. I Freckelton and K Petersen (eds), Disputes and Dilemmas in Health Law (The Federation Press, Annandale NSW 2006) 91.
26. Presland v Hunter Area Health Service [2003] NSWSC 754, [136] (Adams J).
27. Hunter Area Health Service v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 27 (Spigelman CJ).
28. Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW), s 3. However, recent amendments to the Mental Health (Criminal Procedure) Act 1990 (NSW) introduce protection of the public as an object in relation to forensic and correctional patients: s 40(a), inserted by the Mental Health Legislation Amendment (Forensic Provisions) Act 2008 (NSW) (uncommenced).
29. Mental Health Act 1993 (SA), s 5.
30. Mental Health Act 1996 (WA), s 5; Mental Health (Treatment and Care) Act 1994 (ACT), s 7; Mental Health and Related Services Act (NT), s 3.
31. Wilson v Mental Health Review Board [2000] VSC 404, [30] (O'Bryan J).
32. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (adopted 13 December 2006, opened for signature 30 March 2007, entered into force 3 May 2008). For an analysis of the potential effect of the UN Convention on mental health laws see, B McSherry (ed), Special Edition 'International Trends in Mental Health Laws' (2008) 26(2) Law in Context 1-159.
33. Hunter Area Health Service v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 28 (Spigelman CJ).
34. Crimmins v Stevedoring Industry Finance Committee [1999] 200 CLR 1, 43 (McHugh J).
35. Wilson v Mental Health Review Board [2000] VSC 404.
36. Cited with approval in Clunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority [1998] 3 All ER 180 (EWCACiv).
37. Ellis v Counties Manukau District Health Board [2007] 1 NZLR 196, 231.
38. E Grundell, 'Psychiatrists' Perceptions of Administrative Review: A Victorian Empirical Study' (2005) 12(1) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 68.
39. Hunter Area Health Service v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 123 (Santow JA).
40. Hunter Area Health Service v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 100 (Sheller JA).
41. Freckelton (n 3).
42. P Bean, Discharged From Mental Hospitals (Macmillan in association with MIND Publications, Basingstoke England 1993) 112.
43. Freckelton (n 3).
44. Home Office v Dorset Yacht Company Ltd [1970] AC 1004 (HL); Palmer v Tees Health Authority [1999] 1 Lloyd's Rep (Medical) 351 (EWCACiv).
45. Hunter Area Health Service and Another v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 102 (Sheller JA).
46. I Freckelton, 'Distractors and Distressors in Involuntary Status Decision-Making' (2005) 12(1) Psychiatry, Psychology and Law 88.
47. W Brookbanks (ed), Psychiatry and the Law: Clinical and Legal Issues (Brooker's, Wellington 1996) 65.
48. Hunter Area Health Service and Another v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR 22, 102 (Sheller JA).
49. Hunter Area Health Service and Another v Presland (2005) 63 NSWLR, 122-23 (Santow JA).