The proposed changes under the Tasmanian and Victorian draft mental health bills will ensure that, in line with local and international human rights obligations, only patients who lack decision-making capacity may be coercively treated for mental illness. However the continuing 'additional harm' criteria may breach human rights obligations by imposing a discriminatory threshold for care on patients who are unable to consent to treatment for themselves. This could be avoided by replacing the 'additional harm' test with a 'best interests' test.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Callaghan et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: