English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

A case report is presented which highlights two important, but rarely evoked, aspects of mental health law. In this case, the mentally ill person's nearest relative did not wish to act as such and rescinded his responsibility in favour of another. This other person objected to the use of section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and displacement of her as nearest relative was considered. Some cases from the literature are cited to help clarify the meaning of “unreasonable objection” as used in the Mental Health Act 1983.

Rescinding responsibilities as nearest relative and displacing the nearest relative