ABSTRACT
The law exists to contain and control people. In so doing it can, however, provide a means to reassure people of their freedom. The primary purpose of much mental health law appears to be focused on control: especially providing a legal basis for ensuring that people are ‘cared for’ or ‘treated’, whether or not they desire this. In that sense, mental health law has little interest in assuring the freedoms of the ‘mentally ill’. This is, however, a crude picture. The finer detail shows the efforts made within the broad legislation, to ensure that aspects of freedom are maintained. However, in the final analysis not much has changed since the first such laws were framed over 150 years ago. Few people can avoid some version of ‘involuntary commitment’ (or ‘sectioning’) if someone decides that this is in their ‘best interests’ or to the benefit of society.
