{"title":"安娜·尼尔森,强制性心理健康干预和CRPD:思想平等(哈特出版社,2021年,xi + 186页,67.50英镑)ISBN 97815099315 76 (hb)","authors":"Carter G.","doi":"10.1093/hrlr/ngab032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘CRPD’) is the first international human rights treaty to recognize rights specifically for disabled people. It has been heralded as revolutionary in creating a ‘paradigm shift’ in how disability is understood within law. The CRPD moves away from a medical model of disability (which focuses on the individual’s limitations) to a social model of disability (which focuses on social barriers and how they can be alleviated to better promote the rights of disabled people.) Nilsson rightly points out that much of the originality of the CRPD’s approach rests with its focus on equal treatment and non-discrimination (pp 12–14). One of the areas in which disabled people are still discriminated against is in the context of compulsory mental health treatment. The presence of a psychosocial disability is still used in the majority of domestic mental health laws to justify compulsion. This includes where an individual is refusing treatment a professional believes they require and the person either lacks decision making ability, or there is a risk of self harm, harm to others, serious deterioration in health or a combination of these factors (pp 45–49). Therefore, one of the questions dominating CRPD implementation is if and when compulsory treatment is justified under the CRPD.</span>","PeriodicalId":46556,"journal":{"name":"Human Rights Law Review","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Anna Nilsson, Compulsory Mental Health Interventions and the CRPD: Minding Equality (Hart Publishing, 2021, xi + 186pp, £67.50) ISBN 97815099315 76 (hb)\",\"authors\":\"Carter G.\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/hrlr/ngab032\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<span>The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘CRPD’) is the first international human rights treaty to recognize rights specifically for disabled people. It has been heralded as revolutionary in creating a ‘paradigm shift’ in how disability is understood within law. The CRPD moves away from a medical model of disability (which focuses on the individual’s limitations) to a social model of disability (which focuses on social barriers and how they can be alleviated to better promote the rights of disabled people.) Nilsson rightly points out that much of the originality of the CRPD’s approach rests with its focus on equal treatment and non-discrimination (pp 12–14). One of the areas in which disabled people are still discriminated against is in the context of compulsory mental health treatment. The presence of a psychosocial disability is still used in the majority of domestic mental health laws to justify compulsion. This includes where an individual is refusing treatment a professional believes they require and the person either lacks decision making ability, or there is a risk of self harm, harm to others, serious deterioration in health or a combination of these factors (pp 45–49). Therefore, one of the questions dominating CRPD implementation is if and when compulsory treatment is justified under the CRPD.</span>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46556,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Rights Law Review\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Rights Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab032\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Rights Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/hrlr/ngab032","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Anna Nilsson, Compulsory Mental Health Interventions and the CRPD: Minding Equality (Hart Publishing, 2021, xi + 186pp, £67.50) ISBN 97815099315 76 (hb)
The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (‘CRPD’) is the first international human rights treaty to recognize rights specifically for disabled people. It has been heralded as revolutionary in creating a ‘paradigm shift’ in how disability is understood within law. The CRPD moves away from a medical model of disability (which focuses on the individual’s limitations) to a social model of disability (which focuses on social barriers and how they can be alleviated to better promote the rights of disabled people.) Nilsson rightly points out that much of the originality of the CRPD’s approach rests with its focus on equal treatment and non-discrimination (pp 12–14). One of the areas in which disabled people are still discriminated against is in the context of compulsory mental health treatment. The presence of a psychosocial disability is still used in the majority of domestic mental health laws to justify compulsion. This includes where an individual is refusing treatment a professional believes they require and the person either lacks decision making ability, or there is a risk of self harm, harm to others, serious deterioration in health or a combination of these factors (pp 45–49). Therefore, one of the questions dominating CRPD implementation is if and when compulsory treatment is justified under the CRPD.
期刊介绍:
Launched in 2001, Human Rights Law Review seeks to promote awareness, knowledge, and discussion on matters of human rights law and policy. While academic in focus, the Review is also of interest to the wider human rights community, including those in governmental, inter-governmental and non-governmental spheres, concerned with law, policy, and fieldwork. The Review publishes critical articles that consider human rights in their various contexts, from global to national levels, book reviews, and a section dedicated to analysis of recent jurisprudence and practice of the UN and regional human rights systems.