Mental health legislation (civil) in Australia and China: a comparative study

Mendelson, Danuta and Lin, Nuannuan 2016, Mental health legislation (civil) in Australia and China: a comparative study, Journal of law and medicine, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 762-779.

Attached Files
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Title Mental health legislation (civil) in Australia and China: a comparative study
Author(s) Mendelson, DanutaORCID iD for Mendelson, Danuta
Lin, NuannuanORCID iD for Lin, Nuannuan
Journal name Journal of law and medicine
Volume number 23
Issue number 4
Start page 762
End page 779
Total pages 18
Publisher Thomson Reuters (Professional)
Place of publication Rozelle, N.S.W.
Publication date 2016-07-08
ISSN 1320-159X
Summary This comparative review of statutory provisions of Australian and Chinese law focuses on accessibility of mental health care, diagnosis, admission and treatment orders for involuntary patients in civil cases as well as discharge procedures. The introduction contextualises the object of the comparative study, including key rights and principles that are used as the basis for analysis. Such factors as different political and legal systems, history, culture, and infrastructure resources of China and Australia form the background for the legal examination. Not surprisingly, these five factors, rather than statutory texts per se, are found to be the most important drivers of each country’s approach to the law of mental health. Two cases, XX v WW [2014] VSC 564 in Australia and Xu Lixin v Xu Canxing, Qingchun Psychiatric Rehabilitation Hospital of Shanghai [2015], known as the Right to Liberty Case, in China illustrate practical differences in legal approach to involuntary treatment. The comparative analysis concludes by identifying the most problematic aspects of the legislation in each country.
Language eng
Field of Research 180106 Comparative Law
Socio Economic Objective 970118 Expanding Knowledge in Law and Legal Studies
HERDC Research category C1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal
Copyright notice ©2016, Thomson Reuters (Professional)
Persistent URL

Document type: Journal Article
Collections: Faculty of Business and Law
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 1 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Access Statistics: 371 Abstract Views, 1 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics
Created: Mon, 31 Oct 2016, 10:28:51 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact