Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to explain a decision of the Court of Appeal about the duty an Approved Mental Health Professional (AMHP) will sometimes have to consult a patient's nearest relative, and to set that decision in the context of an earlier one. Design/methodology/approach– Each decision is examined in detail and one is compared with the other. Reference is made to the Mental Health Act 1983 Code of Practice. Findings– It will be harder for an AMHP to establish that consultation is not reasonably practicable, and it will be correspondingly easier, in some cases, for a nearest relative to obtain information about a patient or achieve proximity to her. Originality/value– This is thought to be the first time the two cases have been considered together or in their true context.
The Journal of Adult Protection – Emerald Publishing
Published: Feb 9, 2015
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.