Compulsory Treatment in the Community in Hong Kong
Implications of the Current Law and Practice on the Rights of Persons with Mental Illnesses
In: Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the LawSearch for other papers by Urania Chiu in
Current site
Google Scholar
This article examines the current legal framework and practice of the conditional discharge of mental health patients in Hong Kong under Section 42B of the Mental Health Ordinance from a human rights perspective. Using existing literature and findings from semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with medical professionals, the author argues that the current regime lacks adequate safeguards for mental health patients, both in law and in actual practice, and suffers from the absence of a clear guiding purpose. As such, the law and practice of conditional discharge would most likely infringe patients’ fundamental rights to private and family life and to liberty and personal security. The article concludes with the suggestion that an evidence-based approach is required to determine the purpose of the regime and how it may be best designed for that end.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1230 | 110 | 14 |
| Full Text Views | 65 | 12 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 105 | 14 | 3 |
Compulsory Treatment in the Community in Hong Kong
Implications of the Current Law and Practice on the Rights of Persons with Mental Illnesses
In: Asia-Pacific Journal on Human Rights and the LawSearch for other papers by Urania Chiu in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
This article examines the current legal framework and practice of the conditional discharge of mental health patients in Hong Kong under Section 42B of the Mental Health Ordinance from a human rights perspective. Using existing literature and findings from semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with medical professionals, the author argues that the current regime lacks adequate safeguards for mental health patients, both in law and in actual practice, and suffers from the absence of a clear guiding purpose. As such, the law and practice of conditional discharge would most likely infringe patients’ fundamental rights to private and family life and to liberty and personal security. The article concludes with the suggestion that an evidence-based approach is required to determine the purpose of the regime and how it may be best designed for that end.
| All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 1230 | 110 | 14 |
| Full Text Views | 65 | 12 | 3 |
| PDF Views & Downloads | 105 | 14 | 3 |
