Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T20:27:38.952Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Author's reply

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Anthony Maden
Anthony Maden*
Affiliation:
Division of Neurosciences and Mental Health, Imperial College London. Email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Correspondence
Information
The British Journal of Psychiatry , Volume 193 , Issue 5 , November 2008 , pp. 426
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2008 

Article, 100; response, 300+. Is this a metaphor for the medico-legal contribution to psychiatric knowledge, i.e. more words? The ‘evidence’ for treatability of detained patients is the case law: tribunals don't discharge them and stretch the definition of treatment in so far it makes sense only to lawyers. I don't criticise the players for making a living, but the waste of public money from asking the wrong people the wrong question. Still, the profession could do more by ensuring independent experts in psychiatry (as in other branches of medicine) have clinical or research expertise rather than just an opinion (100).

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.