Abstract
Since April 2009, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) has been responsible for
regulating standards of health and adult social care in England, as well as monitoring the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983. The latter function was previously performed by the Mental Health Act Commission (MHAC). This article compares the role and functions of both bodies in terms of their ability to provide a legitimate system of regulation and an effective safeguard for psychiatric patients who are deprived of their liberty. This paper is important, as there is very little published data to date on the work of the CQC and its predecessor, the MHAC. It is also necessary to evaluate changes to the regulatory landscape and compare the different regimes, to find out whether it has improved the protection and quality of care for mental health patients. The article concludes that the CQC does have the capacity to monitor detention, enforce standards and improve the quality of patient care, as long as it continues to endorse a commitment to human rights and service user involvement, to preserve the expertise and knowledge of visiting inspectors and to maintain accountability and independence from the State.
regulating standards of health and adult social care in England, as well as monitoring the operation of the Mental Health Act 1983. The latter function was previously performed by the Mental Health Act Commission (MHAC). This article compares the role and functions of both bodies in terms of their ability to provide a legitimate system of regulation and an effective safeguard for psychiatric patients who are deprived of their liberty. This paper is important, as there is very little published data to date on the work of the CQC and its predecessor, the MHAC. It is also necessary to evaluate changes to the regulatory landscape and compare the different regimes, to find out whether it has improved the protection and quality of care for mental health patients. The article concludes that the CQC does have the capacity to monitor detention, enforce standards and improve the quality of patient care, as long as it continues to endorse a commitment to human rights and service user involvement, to preserve the expertise and knowledge of visiting inspectors and to maintain accountability and independence from the State.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 149-167 |
| Number of pages | 19 |
| Journal | Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law |
| Volume | 36 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| Early online date | 7 Jul 2014 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2014 |
Research Groups and Themes
- Centre for Health, Law and Society
- Human Rights Implementation Centre
Keywords
- Care Quality Commission
- Mental Health Act Commission
- Mental Health Act 1983
- patient rights
- monitoring detention
- regulating mental health care
Access to Document
- Full-text PDF (accepted author manuscript)
This is the accepted author manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online viaTaylor & Francis at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2014.916083. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher.
Handle.net
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Protecting the rights of patients in psychiatric settings: A comparison of the work of the Mental Health Act Commission with the Care Quality Commission'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Profiles
-
Professor Judy M Laing
- Bristol Poverty Institute
- University of Bristol Law School - Professor of Mental Health Law, Rights and Policy
Person: Academic , Member