The virtues and vices of professionalism

Professionalism in Mental Healthcare: Experts, Expertise and Expectations

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 17-31

  Montgomery, Jonathan ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHAMPTON   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84927062376     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511910074.004     Document Type: Chapter

References (33)

1. Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards (2009a). Annual Report 2009 Round. London: ACCEA.
2. Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards (2009b). Guide for Applicants. London: ACCEA.
3. Advisory Committee on Clinical Excellence Awards (2009c). Guide for Assessors. London: ACCEA.
4. Alderson P, Montgomery J (1996). Heath Care Choices: Making Decisions with Children. London: Institute for Public Policy Research.
5. Berlin I (1969). Two concepts of liberty. In Four Essays on Liberty. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
6. Bolam v W Friern HMC[1957]. 2 All England Reports 118.
7. Bolitho v City & Hackney HA[1997]. 4 All England Reports 771.
8. Chan v Barts and the London NHS Trust[2007]. England &Wales High Court 2914.
9. De Freitas v O’Brien[1995]. 6 Medical Law Reports 108.
10. Department of Health (2003). The New NHS Consultant Reward Scheme: Clinical Excellence Awards. London: DH.
11. Irvine D, Johnson N, Thistlethwaite J, Lewando Hundt G (2010). Professionalism: the UK perspective. In D Bhugra, A Malik (eds.) Professionalism in Mental Healthcare: Experts, Expertise and Expectations. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 48–61.
12. Kendell R (1994). Report of theWorking Party on the Review of the Consultants Distinction Awards Scheme. Leeds: NHS Executive, issued with EL(94)99.
13. Kennedy H (2000). Managers’ hearings: dialectic and maternalism. Psychiatric Bulletin24, 361–362.
14. Johnson T (1972). Professions and Power. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
15. Mahon v Osborne [1939]. 1 All England Reports 535.
16. Miola J (2004).Medical law and medical ethics – complementary or corrosive? Medical Law International6, 251–274.
17. Montgomery J (1989). Medicine, accountability and professionalism. Journal of Law and Society 16, 319–339.
18. Montgomery J (1992). Doctors handmaidens: the legal contribution. In S McVeigh, S Wheeler (eds.) Law, Health and Medical Regulation. Aldershot: Dartmouth.
19. Montgomery J (1996). Patients first: the role of rights. In K Fulford, S Errser, A Hope (eds.) Essential Practice in Patient-Centred Care. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 142–152.
20. Montgomery J (1998). Professional regulation: a gendered phenomenon? In S Sheldon, M Thomson (eds.) Feminist Perspectives in Health Care Law. London: Cavendish, 33–51.
21. Montgomery J (2000). Time for a paradigm shift? Medical law in transition. Current Legal Problems53, 363–408.
22. Montgomery J (2003). Health Care Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. Montgomery J (2006). Law and the demoralization of medicine. Legal Studies26, 185–210.
24. Parsons T (1939).The professions and the social structure. Social Forces17, 457.
25. Royal College of Physicians (2005a). Doctors in Society:Medical Professionalism in a ChangingWorld. Report of a Working Party of the Royal College of Physicians of London. London: RCP.
26. Royal College of Physicians (2005b). Doctors in Society:Medical Professionalism in a ChangingWorld. Technical Supplement to a Report of aWorking Party of the Royal College of Physicians of London. London: RCP.
27. Scarman L (1987). Law and medical practice. In P Byrne (ed.) Medicine in Contemporary Society. London: King Edwards Fund for London, 131–139.
28. Sidaway v Bethlem RHG[1985]. 1 All England Reports 643.
29. Timmins N (1995). The Five Giants: A Biography of theWelfare State. London: HarperCollins.
30. Turner B (1995). Medical Power and Social Knowledge. London: Sage Publications.
31. Unsworth C (1987). The Politics ofMental Health Legislation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32. Wilsher v Essex AHA[1986]. 3 All England Reports 801.
33. Woolf H (2001). Are the courts excessively deferential to the medical profession? Medical Law Review 9, 1.