wow-inequalities/02-data/intermediate/wos_sample/0937006778671417a5db770205560802-gupta-snehil-and-mi/info.yaml

126 lines
4.1 KiB
YAML

abstract: 'The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 (MHCA) of India is a landmark and
welcome step towards centering persons with mental illness (PwMI) and
recognizing their rights concerning their treatment and care decisions
and ensuring the availability of mental healthcare services. As
mentioned in its preamble, the Act is a step towards aligning India''s
laws or mental health (MH) policy with the United Nations Convention on
the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (UNCRPD), which India ratified
in 2007. Amidst several positives, the implementation of the Act has
been marred by certain practical issues which are partly attributed to
the inherent conceptual limitations.Countries across the globe, both
High Income-and Low-and Middle-Income Countries, have enacted
legislation to ensure that the rights of treatment and care of PwMI are
respected, protected, and fulfilled. They have also provisioned
quasi-judicial bodies (Mental Health Review Boards MHRBs/tribunals) for
ensuring these rights. However, their structure and function vary.This
paper compares the constitution and functioning of review boards across
different countries and intends to provide future directions for the
effective implementation and functioning of the MHRB under India''s
MHCA.This review found that effective implementation of the MHRB under
MHCA is compromised by an ambitious, six-membered, constitution of the
MHRB, lack of clarity about the realistic combination of the quorum to
adjudicate decisions, inadequate human and financial resources, and an
overstretched area of functioning.Although MHRB has been envisaged as a
quasi-judicial authority to ensure the rights of PwMI, it needs to be
made more pragmatic. The size and composition of the MHRB currently
envisaged is likely to be a barrier in the establishment of the MHRB as
well as its functioning. A smaller composition (3-5 membered) involving
one psychiatrist, one judicial/legal member, and at least one PwMI or
member from civil society having lived experience of working with PwMI
or caregiver, could be a more pragmatic approach. The passing of this
law also necessitates increasing the overall health budget, especially
the mental health budget with funds earmarked specifically for the
implementation of the law, which necessarily includes setting up the
MHRB. An evaluation of the implementation of the MHRB, including its
determinants, would be a useful step in this direction.'
affiliation: 'Gupta, S (Corresponding Author), All India Inst Med Sci AIIMS, Dept
Psychiat, Bhopal 462022, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Gupta, Snehil, All India Inst Med Sci AIIMS, Dept Psychiat, Bhopal 462022, Madhya
Pradesh, India.
Gill, Neeraj, Univ Canberra, Hlth Res Inst, Canberra, ACT, Australia.
Gill, Neeraj, Griffith Univ, Sch Med \& Dent, Gold Cost, Qld, Australia.
Gill, Neeraj, Gold Coast Hlth QLD Australia, Mental Hlth \& Specialist Serv, Gold
Cost, Qld, Australia.
Misra, Maitreyi, Natl Law Univ, Mental Hlth \& Legal Justice Syst, Delhi, India.'
article-number: '101774'
author: Gupta, Snehil and Misra, Maitreyi and Gill, Neeraj
author-email: 'snehil2161@gmail.com
maitreyi.misra@nludelhi.ac.in
neeraj.gill@griffith.edu.au'
author_list:
- family: Gupta
given: Snehil
- family: Misra
given: Maitreyi
- family: Gill
given: Neeraj
da: '2023-09-28'
doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2021.101774
earlyaccessdate: JAN 2022
eissn: 1873-6386
files: []
issn: 0160-2527
journal: INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LAW AND PSYCHIATRY
keywords: 'Mental health legislation; Psychiatry; Review board; Tribunal; Mental
health care act; India'
language: English
month: MAR-APR
number-of-cited-references: '46'
orcid-numbers: GUPTA, SNEHIL/0000-0001-5498-2917
papis_id: 9107155a4c3cf5fbaca199f6095145e0
ref: Gupta2022mentalhealth
tags:
- review
times-cited: '0'
title: 'Mental health review board under the Mental Health Care Act (2017), India:
A critique and learning from review boards of other nations'
type: article
unique-id: WOS:000791993900003
usage-count-last-180-days: '0'
usage-count-since-2013: '3'
volume: '81'
web-of-science-categories: Law; Psychiatry
year: '2022'