HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS British Journal of Psychiatry Advances in Psychiatric Treatment All RCPsych Journals		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lucas, P. Articles by Scurlock, H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Lucas, P. Articles by Scurlock, H.

Community treatment orders

John Howard Centre, 2 Crozier Terrace, London E9 6AT,

Hilary Scurlock, Consultant Psychiatrist

Mental Health Unit, Chase Farm Hospital, Enfield EN2 8JL

Sir : Trevor Turner et al compare the arguments for community treatment orders (CTOs) with those used to justify car seat-belts (Psychiatric Bulletin, April 2000, 24, 153). The comparison may be apt, but not necessarily as they intend.

John Adams, Professor of Geography and expert on transport, has reviewed social, cultural and practical aspects of ‘risk’ from a wider perspective than is generally found within psychiatry (Adams, 1995). His view of the results of seat belt legislation is unequivocal :

"the law produced no net saving of lives, but redistributed the burden of risk from those who were already the best protected inside vehicles to those who were the most vulnerable outside vehicles."

This occurs because people wearing seat-belts drive (marginally) more dangerously. Adams suggests :

"if all motor vehicles were to be fitted with long sharp spikes emerging from the centre of their steering wheels (or, if you prefer, high explosives to detonate on impact), the disparities in vulnerability and lethality between cyclists and lorry drivers would be greatly reduced. There would probably be a redistribution of casualties, but also a reduction in total number of casualties."

Seat-belts reduce driver deaths - but not deaths overall. Although common sense suggests them to be unarguably a good thing, life is more complicated. Are homicide and suicide inquiries equivalent to Adams' spikes or high explosives ? In some ways. Does it help to fit spikes to steering wheels ? Some drivers probably stop driving altogether or at least take early retirement. In terms of risk, will CTOs prove to be like seat-belts ? If so, Turner's or Adams' ?

References

ADAMS, J. (1995) Risk. London : UCL Press.

This Article Full Text (PDF) Submit an eLetter Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Lucas, P. Articles by Scurlock, H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Lucas, P. Articles by Scurlock, H.