Mental Health Review Tribunals in Action: A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature

@article{Thom2014MentalHR,
  title={Mental Health Review Tribunals in Action: A Systematic Review of the Empirical Literature},
  author={Katey Thom and Ivana Nakarada-Kordic},
  journal={Psychiatry, Psychology and Law},
  year={2014},
  volume={21},
  pages={112 - 126}
}
The effectiveness of Mental Health Review Tribunals in providing safeguards for patients to ensure their right to be free from unjustified detention or treatment has been subject to much criticism in the literature. This article systematically reviews studies on the decision-making of such tribunals in order to synthesize the literature thematically and subject it to an assessment of methodological rigour [Hawker, S., Payne, S., Kerr, C., Hardey, M., & Powell, J. (2002). Appraising the evidence… 

Are mental health tribunals operating in accordance with international human rights standards? A systematic review of the international literature.

It is suggested that mental health tribunals may need to do more to safeguard legislative principles and human rights standards that promote patient autonomy, as well as assess the extent to which this is reflected in such literature.

Checking and Balancing New Zealand's Mental Health Review Tribunal: Perspectives of Forensic Patients

For participants, the application process and hearing had variable value and utility, although some participants reported that the MHRT afforded them dignity because they had the right to challenge their compulsory detention.

New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal characteristics and outcomes 1993–2011

  • Katey Thom
  • Medicine
    Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists
  • 2014
The success rates of New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal applicants is low compared with some international jurisdictions, while at the same time withdrawals are high, warranting further investigation.

Improving the Quality of Medical Reports for Mental Health Tribunals

The detailed content of reports significantly improved from 2014 to 2015 with authors including adjustments for a fair hearing and assessment of a patient's capacity (p<0.001, medium effect sizes).

Predictors of Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) outcome in a forensic inpatient population: a prospective cohort study

It is suggested that by reducing levels of agitated behaviour, verbal aggression, and physical violence on the ward, achieving unescorted community leave, and targeting specific items on the HCR-20 risk assessment tool, patients may be able to improve their changes of discharge at a MHRT.

Meaningful participation or tokenism for individuals on community based compulsory treatment orders? Views and experiences of the mental health tribunal in Scotland

  • A. Macgregor
  • Psychology, Medicine
    Journal of mental health
  • 2020
It is suggested that participation is often experienced as tokenistic in practice and that cultural change is required if people are to be meaningfully involved in tribunal proceedings.

Service users’ experiences of mental health tribunals in Ireland: a qualitative analysis

The provision of accessible information and emotional support through the stages of the involuntary admission process appear likely to be beneficial and service users should automatically be offered the option of having a support person of their choosing present during tribunals.

A comparison of mental health legislation in five developed countries: a narrative review

Across the five jurisdictions examined, largely similar procedures for admission, detention and treatment of involuntary patients are employed, reflecting adherence with international standards and incorporation of human rights-based principles.

Forensic patients, treating psychiatrist and the Mental Health Review Tribunal – An ethical question?

  • R. MaheshwariYvonne Skinner
  • Medicine, Psychology
    Australasian psychiatry : bulletin of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists
  • 2019
Examination of specific ethical ambiguities for a treating psychiatrist at the interface of legal process related to leave and release decisions in the treatment of forensic patients finds a conscientious adherence to clinical facts and awareness of the ‘Two Hats’ ethical pitfall can serve as important reference points in framing the psychiatric evidence in the decision-making process.

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 65 REFERENCES

Mental health tribunals: an issue for clinical governance

Examination of reasons given by Mental Health Review Tribunals for discharging patients from detention and the effect the length of detainment had on the immediate outcome of discharged patients found improved aftercare compliance was associated with longer duration on a Section of the Mental Health Act prior to MHRT discharge.

Decision-Making in Mental Health Review Tribunals

Examination of how MHRTs make decisions about whether or not to discharge patients detained under sections 2 and 3 of the Mental Health Act (1983) found significant differences in operation between tribunals from the pre-hearing meeting through to the deliberation.

An audit of the quality of reports to Mental Health Review Tribunals

There is evidence that the majority of the MHRT reports do not satisfactorily meet the tribunal's requirements, and the authors undertook an audit cycle to test the above hypothesis.

Mental Health Tribunals as Governance: Lessons from an Australian Study?

This article draws on a multi-year Australian collaborative study of mental health review tribunals in three jurisdictions (Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory) undertaken

The Therapeutic Intent of the New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal

The New Zealand Mental Health Review Tribunal states that therapeutic intentions guide its decision-making process. The review body reports that it endeavours to make positive comments and promote

Mental Health Tribunals—Rights, Protection, or Treatment? Lessons from the ARC Linkage Grant Study?

This article reports possible operational or policy implications for Mental Health Tribunals (‘MHTs’) of findings from a multi-year Australian collaborative study of mental health review tribunals in

Mental Health Tribunals: 'TJ' Implications of Weighing Fairness, Freedom, Protection and Treatment

People with a serious mental illness warranting possible compulsory care and treatment are vulnerable and disempowered. Mental health tribunal hearings must balance the rights to freedom, public

Is the Mental Health Review Tribunal Inherently Unfair to Patients?

The aim of this article is to examine the evidence as to whether MHRTs are inherently unfair to patients and biased towards overcautious professionals, and consider this in the light of various changes to the MHRT system proposed and adopted over recent years.

Mental heath review tribunals: A survey of special hospital patients' opinions

Given the costs of aborted tribunal applications and unsuccessful hearings, consideration should be given to greater liaison between legal and medical representatives of patients when considering application for a tribunal hearing, and greater education of patients to improve understanding of the powers of tribunals.

Preparing for Mental Health Review Tribunals: reports and dilemmas

This article is designed to aid the RMO or inde pendent doctor in the preparation of written tri bunal reports, highlight common problems posed when making recommendations, and assist in the Preparation of oral evidence.
...