Liability of psychiatrists and mental health services for failing to admit or detain patients with mental illness

Abstract

Objectives: To discuss the findings and the various judgements of the courts in the case of Presland v Hunter Area Health Service and to consider the liability of psychiatrists and mental health services for failing to admit or detain patients with mental illness.

Conclusion: In a highly controversial and sometimes misreported decision, the NSW Supreme Court on 21 August 2003 entered judgement for Presland against the Hunter Area Health Service and a third year psychiatry registrar for injury suffered by reason of their negligent failure to care for Presland and, in particular, to detain him in hospital under provisions of the Mental Health Act (NSW). By a majority, the NSW Court of Appeal overturned the decision on 21 April 2005. Judgements in the appeal decision explored the duty of care owed by a psychiatrist to a patient. The decision confirmed that a successful litigant suing for negligence will not recover damages for pain and suffering and economic loss caused as a result of not being admitted for treatment of a mental illness before committing a violent offence.

• duty of care
• mental illness
• negligence

Notes

^aMethylenedioxyamphetamine, street name ‘ecstasy’.

^bSutherland Shire Council v Heyman (1985) 157 CLR 424 at 458.

^cPresland v Hunter Area Health Service and Anon (2003) NSWSC 754 at 21.

^dPresland v Hunter Area Health Services and Anon (2003) NSWSC 754 at 119.

^ePresland v Hunter Area Health Services and Anon (2003) NSWSC 754 at 156.

^fPresland v Hunter Area Health Services and Anon (2003) NSWSC 754 at 159.

^gHunter Area Health Service and Anor v Presland (2005) NSWCA 33 at 286.

^hHunter Area Health Services and Anor v Presland (2005) NSWCA 33 at

ⁱSmith v Leur (1945) 70 CLR 256 at 262. 299.

^jClunis v Camden and Islington Health Authority (1998) QB 978.

^kWilliamson v Liptzin 539 SE. 2nd 313 (NC App 2000) at 323.