Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Contents:

Information:

  • Access

Actions:

      • Send article to Kindle

        To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

        Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

        Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

        Author’s reply
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Dropbox

        To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

        Author’s reply
        Available formats
        ×

        Send article to Google Drive

        To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

        Author’s reply
        Available formats
        ×
Export citation

We are grateful to Dr Watt for his thoughtful response. He makes the very point that we raised in our editorial; namely that applying Montgomery in practice raises interesting questions for different psychiatrists working in different settings. One of us is a consultant in forensic child and adolescent mental health services so recognises the issues Dr Watts describes; another is a consultant in long-term secure care where patients and professionals may have different value perspectives on risk.

We therefore entirely concur that more debate and discussion about the Montgomery judgment is needed; and we hoped our editorial would stimulate this kind of debate. We especially hope that the Montgomery judgment will encourage psychiatrists in all settings to think about how best to establish dialogue with patients about treatment that allows exploration of different values from the both the patients’ and the professionals’ perspective. It is this emphasis on exploration of what is important to all parties in terms of treatment experience and outcome (not just risk) that makes Montgomery such an interesting case for psychiatrists.