Mental health review tribunal medical reports

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


Aims and method Medical reports submitted to mental health review tribunals should be of a clinically acceptable standard. We examined 100 medical reports to assess whether they stated the four criteria for detention under Section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983. We compared the standard of reports according to the seniority, qualifications and speciality of the doctor, and with the outcome from the tribunal.

Results The majority of the reports were written by junior doctors and did not fulfil the criteria laid down by the Mental Health Act 1983. Consultant and forensic psychiatry status were associated with completed reports.

Clinical implications This study was performed in one hospital only but highlights the ongoing need to review and improve the workings of the Mental Health Act before reform is considered.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)615-618
JournalThe Psychiatric Bulletin (United Kingdom)
Publication statusPublished - 1998


Dive into the research topics of 'Mental health review tribunal medical reports'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this