Doctors on tribunals

Abstract

BackgroundMental health review tribunals are required to apply legal criteria within a clinical context. This can create tensions within both law and psychiatry.AimsTo examine the role of the medical member of the tribunal as a possible mediator between the two disciplines.MethodObservation of tribunal hearings and panel deliberations and interviews with tribunal members were used to describe the role of the medical member.ResultsThe dual roles imposed on the medical member as witness and decisionmaker and as doctor and legal actor create formal demands and ethical conflicts that are hard, in practice, either to meet or to resolve.ConclusionsThe structure for providing tribunals with access to expert psychiatric input and advice requires reconsideration.