G Richardson1, D Machin. 1. Department of Law, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mental health review tribunals are required to apply legal criteria within a clinical context. This can create tensions within both law and psychiatry. AIMS: To examine the role of the medical member of the tribunal as a possible mediator between the two disciplines. METHOD: Observation of tribunal hearings and panel deliberations and interviews with tribunal members were used to describe the role of the medical member. RESULTS: The dual roles imposed on the medical member as witness and decision-maker and as doctor and legal actor create formal demands and ethical conflicts that are hard, in practice, either to meet or to resolve. CONCLUSIONS: The structure for providing tribunals with access to expert psychiatric input and advice requires reconsideration.
BACKGROUND: Mental health review tribunals are required to apply legal criteria within a clinical context. This can create tensions within both law and psychiatry. AIMS: To examine the role of the medical member of the tribunal as a possible mediator between the two disciplines. METHOD: Observation of tribunal hearings and panel deliberations and interviews with tribunal members were used to describe the role of the medical member. RESULTS: The dual roles imposed on the medical member as witness and decision-maker and as doctor and legal actor create formal demands and ethical conflicts that are hard, in practice, either to meet or to resolve. CONCLUSIONS: The structure for providing tribunals with access to expert psychiatric input and advice requires reconsideration.
Entities:
Keywords:
Empirical Approach; Legal Approach; Mental Health Therapies