Mental Health Review Tribunals: A comparison of the content of tribunal reports for discharged and not discharged patients and for the effect of legal classification

Abstract

Abstract This study examined the content of reports provided for Mental Health Review Tribunals. A retrospective design was used to compare the tribunal reports of fifty patients. Two groups of twenty five patients were compared, one including patients discharged by tribunals and the other patients not discharged. Social combination theory and valence theory were used to analyse the content of the reports and to assess whether they were associated with tribunal outcome. Opinion statements discussing suitability for discharge were more closely associated with outcome than fact statements. For the statements presenting subjects positively or negatively, fact statements were more closely associated with outcome. The valence of both types of statements was also found to be related to outcome, with more positive values being achieved for discharged subjects. Comparison of reports written for previous tribunals before any of the subjects in the study were discharged indicated that those subjects who went on to ...