ABSTRACT
Leaving aside the special problems that can arise when dealing with the mentally ill criminal offender, it is generally accepted that compulsorily detaining someone who has committed no offence is probably the most serious interference with civil liberties that a state can impose. In consequence, its ethical underpinning must be beyond reproach, and the mechanism which allows this to be done should be open to the most searching scrutiny. We are concerned here with balancing, on the one hand, the rights of the individual, and, on the other hand, both the utilitarian desire to protect the community at large, and the paternalistic impulse to protect the individual from harming himself. This is refl ected in the Mental Health Act 1983, by which compulsory civil detention, either for assessment or treatment, is permitted when the patient is suffering from mental disorder and ought to be detained either to protect themselves or others (the latter being a mixture of paternalism and community protection).
