Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T14:34:11.852Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Author's response

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Anne E. Thompson
Anne E. Thompson*
Affiliation:
Horizon Centre, Lincolnshire, Lincolnshire Partnership NHS Foundation Trust, UK, email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Columns
Information
The Psychiatrist , Volume 35 , Issue 12 , December 2011 , pp. 476
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2011

Dr Bronks takes issue with a number of matters in my paper and helpfully includes extracts from source materials to orientate the reader to his corrections and clarifications. While bowing to Dr Bronk's superior knowledge of legal detail, I stand by several of my assertions which reflect decisions I have been supported to make in my clinical practice. I suggest that this exchange illustrates that decisions made in medico-legal work are always open to challenge, and psychiatrists should have a low threshold for seeking advice on a case-by-case basis about medico-legal matters.

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.