Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Untangling the Surrogacy Web and Exploring Legal Duties Following the Discharge of Mental Health Patients

  • Recent Developments
  • Published:
Journal of Bioethical Inquiry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. See, for example, Parentage Act 2004 (ACT), Surrogacy Act 2010 (NSW), Surrogacy Act 2010 (Qld), Family Relationships Act 1975 (SA), Surrogacy Act 2012 (Tas), Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act 2008 (Vic), and Surrogacy Act 2008 (WA).

  2. Consideration of the wording of applicable legislation will be necessary in each case. In this matter, the legislation considered was the Mental Health Act 1990 (NSW), since replaced by the Mental Health Act 2007 (NSW). Section 68 of the current Act also refers to care and treatment in the least restrictive environment enabling the care and treatment to be effectively given.

  3. McKenna & Simon v Hunter & New England Local Health District [2013] NSWCA 476 at [1], [165]–[166]. The majority also held that the Health Service was not entitled to the protection of s 43 or s 43A of the Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW), as the claims were not for breach of statutory duty or based on the Hospital’s exercise of, or failure to exercise, a special statutory power conferred by s 35(3) of the Mental Health Act 1990: at [1], [167], [174]–[176], [178]; Garling J contra at [286].

  4. See also s 4(2)(b): “[E]very function, discretion and jurisdiction conferred or imposed” by the Act be, as far as practicable, performed or exercised, so that (among other things) “any restriction on the liberty of patients and other persons who are mentally ill or mentally disordered and any interference with their rights, dignity and self-respect are kept to the minimum necessary in the circumstances.”

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Adelaide Law School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia

    Bernadette Richards

  2. National Practice Group Leader, Medical Law, Slater & Gordon; Adjunct Fellow, School of Law, University of Western Sydney, Sydney, Australia

    Bill Madden

  3. School of Law, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia

    Tina Cockburn

Authors
  1. Bernadette Richards
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bill Madden
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tina Cockburn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bernadette Richards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Richards, B., Madden, B. & Cockburn, T. Untangling the Surrogacy Web and Exploring Legal Duties Following the Discharge of Mental Health Patients. Bioethical Inquiry 12, 25–29 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-014-9592-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11673-014-9592-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation