Supported Decision-Making and Paradigm Shifts
Word Play or Real Change
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 15529938 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Jill Stavert (0000-0002-1591-4601, Edinburgh Napier University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 11 |
| Pages | 571005-571005 |
| Publication date | 2021-01-11 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Frontiers in Psychiatry (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1664-0640 • E-ISSN: 1664-0640 |
| Publisher | Frontiers Media (PUBLISHER • CH) |
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.571005 |
| PMID | 33505323 |
| OpenAlex | W3118934782 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 26 |
Article 12(3) CRPD requires states parties to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity. This is to ensure that the rights, will and preferences of persons with disabilities are enjoyed on an equal basis with others [Articles 12(1)(2) and (4) CRPD]. Moreover, the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities has made it clear that supported decision-making must replace substitute decision-making arrangements as these are discriminatory and deny equal enjoyment of the right to exercise of legal capacity for persons. At the same time, there is ongoing debate as to whether or not the absence of substitute decision-making regimes is essential for the non-discriminatory realization of an individual's rights, will and preferences to be achieved. To resolve this debate, however, specific attention needs to be paid to the CRPD message on what it actually means to give effect to the equal and non-discriminatory enjoyment of rights for all. In the context of persons with mental disabilities this requires looking beyond human rights simply in terms of limiting unwarranted interventions to the proactive removal of obstacles to full rights enjoyment and the creation of environments that respect and support such enjoyment. With this in mind this paper will therefore critically consider the use of supported decision-making within existing substitute decision-making regimes with particular reference to Scotland's mental health and capacity laws. It will consider the challenges this poses and whether it is indeed possible to adapt existing regimes to achieve CRPD compliance. In doing so, it is suggested that a full appreciation of the overarching CRPD message about equality and non-discrimination in the enjoyment of rights is required to bring about such compliance
Context (archaeology · Human rights · Law and economics · Political science · Psychiatry · Psychological intervention · Public relations · Sociology · Healthcare Decision-Making and Restraints · Healthcare innovation and challenges · Law · Mental Health and Patient Involvement · Psychology · Social Psychology
Reversing hard won victories in the name of human rights
Human Rights and Capabilities
Objective and Reasonable? Scrutinising Compulsory Mental Health Interventions from a Non-discrimination Perspective
Psychiatric Advance Directives Under the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities
Supported Decision Making in the Prevention of Compulsory Interventions in Mental Health Care
CRPD and transformative equality
State intervention in the lives of people with disabilities
Navigating the 'Flashing Amber Lights' of the Right to Legal Capacity in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,2 |
| Citation span | 2021 - 2021 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |