Editing Outpatient commitment (section)

==Comparison to inpatient commitment==

The terminology, "outpatient commitment", and legal construction often equate outpatient commitment with inpatient commitment but providing the patient more freedom.{{efn|name=more-autonomy|When introducing the bill introducing CTO in the UK Lord Warner, then Minister of NHS reform, said "That modern approach strikes a balance between individual autonomy and protection of the patient and the public."<ref name="UK-introduction" >{{cite web|url=https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2006-11-28c.654.0#g654.1|title="Hansard 2006"}}</ref>

"CTOs  were  first  conceived  as  a  less  restrictive  alternative  to  involuntary  hospital  admission.  They  allowed  patients  detainable  under  mental  health  legislation  to  be  treated  outside  hospital  and had the same stringent criteria as involuntary admissions.  From  the  perspective  of  clinicians,  patients and their families, as well as human rights lawyers, 'least restrictive' CTOs were considered preferable  to  hospital  detention."<ref name="cto-review">{{cite web|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/3729AB1BC2DE3E105D0A0BF83C4B84CF/S2056467800002619a.pdf/community_treatment_orders_are_they_useful.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/3729AB1BC2DE3E105D0A0BF83C4B84CF/S2056467800002619a.pdf/community_treatment_orders_are_they_useful.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live|title=Community treatment orders: are they useful?}}</ref>}} In practice, outpatient commitment may be used in situations where commitment would not be used because it is cheaper than inpatient commitment;{{efn|"it  has  been  argued that economic and financial imperatives, as much asideologies of good practice9 have driven this policy"<ref name="Brophy McDermott 2003 pp. S84–S88">{{cite journal | last1=Brophy | first1=Lisa | last2=McDermott | first2=Fiona | title=What's Driving Involuntary Treatment in the Community? The Social, Policy, Legal and Ethical Context | journal=Australasian Psychiatry | publisher=SAGE Publications | volume=11 | issue=1_suppl | year=2003 | issn=1039-8562 | doi=10.1046/j.1038-5282.2003.02020.x | pages=S84–S88| s2cid=73876480 }}</ref> }} seen as less draconian; and protects mental health professionals from moral, civil or criminal liability.