Approved mental health professional

Last updated

The role of approved mental health professional (AMHP) in the United Kingdom was created in the 2007 amendment of the Mental Health Act 1983 to replace the role of approved social worker (ASW). [1] The role is broadly similar to the role of the approved social worker but is distinguished in no longer being the exclusive preserve of social workers. It can be undertaken by other professionals including registered mental health or learning disability nurses, occupational therapists and chartered psychologists after completing appropriate post-qualifying masters level training at level 7 NQF and being approved by a local authority for a period of up to five years, subject to re-warranting. An AMHP is approved to carry out functions under the Mental Health Act 1983, and as such, they carry with them a warrant card, like police officers. The role of the AMHP is to coordinate the assessment of individuals who are being considered for detention under the Mental Health Act 1983. The reason why some specialist mental health professionals are eligible to undertake this role is broadly to avoid excessive medicalisation of the assessment and treatment for individuals living with a mental disorder, as defined by section 1 of the Mental Health Act 1983. It is the role of the AMHP to decide, founded on the medical recommendations of doctors (or a doctor for the purpose of section 4 of the Act), whether a person should be detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.

Contents

Professional role

Approved mental health professionals (AMHPs) are trained to implement elements of the Mental Health Act 1983, as amended by the Mental Health Act 2007, in conjunction with medical practitioners. They have received specific training at least at Level 7 on the National Qualifications Framework, such as a MSc Mental Health (AHMP) or PGDip in Mental Health Studies relating to the application the Mental Health Acts, usually lasting one or two years and perform the role in assessing and deciding whether there are grounds to detain mentally disordered people who meet the statutory criteria. The AMHP is also an important healthcare professional when making decisions under guardianship or community treatment orders.

Assessment and detention under the Act is colloquially known as being 'sectioned', or 'sectioning', in reference to the application of sections of the Mental Health Act relevant to this process. The role to apply for the 'section' remains with the AMHP, not the medical doctor, as many professionals and lay individuals think, thus a doctor may feel a section is needed, although it is actually the AMHP who is the individual who will decide if this is required after detailed assessment and consultations with the medical doctors.

Mental Health Act assessments

AMHPs are responsible for organising, co-ordinating and contributing to Mental Health Act assessments. It is the AMHP's duty, when two medical recommendations have been made, to decide whether or not to make an application to a named hospital for the detention of the person who has been assessed. To be detained under the Mental Health Act individuals need to have a mental disorder, the nature or degree of which warrants detention in hospital on the grounds of their health and/or the risk they present to themselves and/or the risk they present to others. [1] The AMHP's role includes arranging for the assessment of the person concerned by two medical practitioners who must be independent of each other and at least one of whom should be a specialist in mental health, called being 'section 12 approved' under section 12 of the Mental Health Act 1983. Preferably one of the medical assessors should have previous acquaintance with the person being assessed. Efforts should be made to seek less restrictive alternatives to detention if it is safe and appropriate to do so, such as using an individual's own support networks, in line with the principle of care in the least restrictive environment. [2] AMHP's are expected to take account of factors such as gender, culture, ethnicity, age, sexuality and disability in their assessments. [2] Efforts should be also made to overcome any communication barriers, such as deafness or the assessors and the assessed not sharing a language, and an interpreter may be required. It is not good practice for one of the assessors to act as interpreter. [2]

The nearest relative

An important factor in assessments is the role of the Nearest Relative . Which person qualifies as the Nearest Relative is determined according to a hierarchy outlined in the Mental Health Act. [1] If the individual is to be detained under Section 2 (assessment) of the Act, the AMHP is expected to make reasonable efforts to contact the Nearest Relative and invite their views. It is also the AMHP's role to inform them of their right to discharge the person concerned in some circumstances. [2] If the individual is to be detained under Section 3 (treatment) of the Act, the AMHP must ask the Nearest Relative if they object to the individual being detained and if they do then the detention cannot go ahead. [2] There are occasions when the Nearest Relative need not be contacted or might need to be displaced by a court. A Nearest Relative can delegate their role to another appropriate person. [2]

Detention in hospital

The assessors are encouraged by the Code of Practice to discuss the assessment together once the two medical examinations and the AMHP's interview have taken place. For Section 2 and Section 3, assessments by medical practitioners need to take place with no more than five clear days between each other. [2] AMHPs then have up to fourteen days from the time of the second medical assessment to make the decision whether or not to make an application for detention. If proceeding with the application, AMHPs are then responsible for organising the detained individual's safe conveyance to hospital. The best method of conveyance is that which ensures the individual's dignity, comfort and safety. This might be by ambulance or by the police or by some other method. [2] The AMHP will attend at the named hospital and will give the paperwork to nursing staff who check it and receive the application on behalf of the hospital managers. Some errors in the paperwork can be rectified later and the application remains valid. Some other errors invalidate the application and the detention is then no longer lawful. [2]

Community treatment orders

The revised Mental Health Act makes provision for community treatment orders (CTOs). CTOs can be arranged for patients detained under Section 3 (treatment) of the Act, allowing them to return to a place of residence in the community, depending on particular specified conditions, such as to the taking of medication or participating in therapies. If conditions are breached, patients can be formally recalled to hospital for a period of up to 72 hours, during which a decision should be made as to whether their CTO should be revoked. If the CTO is revoked, patients return to being at the beginning of a Section 3 and are automatically referred for a mental health review tribunal. AMHPs work with the responsible clinician and others in the process of assessment and decision making in setting up CTOs and in making decisions on revocation.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Medical psychology</span> Application of psychological principles to the practice of medicine

Medical psychology or medico-psychology is the application of psychological principles to the practice of medicine, primarily drug-oriented, for both physical and mental disorders.

Outpatient commitment—also called assisted outpatient treatment (AOT) or community treatment orders (CTO)—refers to a civil court procedure wherein a legal process orders an individual diagnosed with a severe mental disorder to adhere to an outpatient treatment plan designed to prevent further deterioration or recurrence that is harmful to themselves or others.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Forensic psychiatry</span> Subspeciality of psychiatry, related to criminology

Forensic psychiatry is a subspeciality of psychiatry and is related to criminology. It encompasses the interface between law and psychiatry. According to the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, it is defined as "a subspecialty of psychiatry in which scientific and clinical expertise is applied in legal contexts involving civil, criminal, correctional, regulatory, or legislative matters, and in specialized clinical consultations in areas such as risk assessment or employment." A forensic psychiatrist provides services – such as determination of competency to stand trial – to a court of law to facilitate the adjudicative process and provide treatment, such as medications and psychotherapy, to criminals.

The Lanterman–Petris–Short (LPS) Act regulates involuntary civil commitment to a mental health institution in the state of California. The act set the precedent for modern mental health commitment procedures in the United States. The bipartisan bill was co-authored by California State Assemblyman Frank D. Lanterman (R) and California State Senators Nicholas C. Petris (D) and Alan Short (D), and signed into law in 1967 by Governor Ronald Reagan. The Act went into full effect on July 1, 1972. It cited seven articles of intent:

A person's next of kin (NOK) may be that person's spouse, adopted family member or closest living blood relative. Some countries, such as the United States, have a legal definition of "next of kin". In other countries, such as the United Kingdom, "next of kin" may have no legal definition and may not necessarily refer to blood relatives at all.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mental Health Act 1983</span> Law in England and Wales

The Mental Health Act 1983 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It covers the reception, care and treatment of mentally disordered people, the management of their property and other related matters, forming part of the mental health law for the people in England and Wales. In particular, it provides the legislation by which people diagnosed with a mental disorder can be detained in a hospital or police custody and have their disorder assessed or treated against their wishes, informally known as "sectioning". Its use is reviewed and regulated by the Care Quality Commission. The Act was significantly amended by the Mental Health Act 2007. A white paper proposing changes to the act was published in 2021 following an independent review of the act by Simon Wessely.

In England, the First-tier Tribunal , more commonly known as the Mental Health Tribunal, is an independent quasi-judicial body established to safeguard the rights of persons subject to the Mental Health Act 1983. It provides for consideration of appeals against the medical detention or forced treatment of a person who was deemed to be suffering from a mental disorder that was associated with a risk to the health or safety of that person or others.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Forensic social work</span>

Forensic social work is the application of social work to questions and issues relating to the law and legal systems. It is a type of social work that involves the application of social work principles and practices in legal, criminal, and civil contexts. It is a specialized branch of social work that focuses on the intersection of law and mental health. Forensic social work is an important part of the criminal justice system and provides an important link between mental health and the legal system.

Professional social workers are generally considered those who hold a professional degree in social work. In a number of countries and jurisdictions, registration or licensure of people working as social workers is required and there are mandated qualifications. In other places, the professional association sets academic and experiential requirements for admission to membership.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mental Health Act 2007</span> Law of England and Wales

The Mental Health Act 2007 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It amended the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005. It applies to people residing in England and Wales. Most of the Act was implemented on 3 November 2008.

The Mental Health Act Commission was an NHS special health authority that provided a safeguard for people detained in hospital under the powers of the Mental Health Act 1983 in England and Wales. Mental health care is the only part of health care where patients can be treated under compulsion, and necessarily there are very clear legal requirements on hospitals and the other services involved - primarily local authority social services. The Commission was abolished on 31 March 2009.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Mental Health (Scotland) Act 2003, which came into effect on 5 October 2005, is an Act of the Scottish Parliament that enables medical professionals to legally detain and treat people against their will on the grounds of mental disorders, with the Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland and the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland providing safeguards against mistreatment.

The nearest relative is a designated relationship defined in the legislation of England and Wales through the Mental Health Act 1983, as amended by the Mental Health Act 2007. It is the duty of the Approved mental health professional to determine who is the nearest relative of the patient and consult them in the process of assessment, treatment or guardianship. The 'nearest relative' role can be very beneficial to people who have been admitted to hospital against their wishes, however the recruitment process has a number of issues which can be problematic for both the person themselves and the relative who takes on the role.

The Fixated Threat Assessment Centre (FTAC) is a UK police/mental health unit, whose function is to manage the risk to public figures from stalkers and individuals who are fixated on high profile public figures or prominent protected sites. It was formed in 2006 in acknowledgement that perpetrators of attacks and other unwanted incidents overwhelmingly suffered from psychosis, and could often be identified in advance of any incidents from precursor behavioural signs. Preventive treatment could then be applied, for the protection of the relevant public figures as well as the families and neighbours of the sufferer.

Removal to a place of safety is a form of detention.

The Mental Health Act 2008 of Singapore was passed in 2008 to regulate the involuntary detention of a person in a psychiatric institution for the treatment of a mental disorder, or in the interest of the health and safety of the person or the persons around him.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mental health tribunal</span> Tribunal hearing for mental health treatment disputes

A mental health tribunal is a specialist tribunal (hearing) empowered by law to adjudicate disputes about mental health treatment and detention, primarily by conducting independent reviews of patients diagnosed with mental disorders who are detained in psychiatric hospitals, or under outpatient commitment, and who may be subject to involuntary treatment.

Involuntary commitment or civil commitment is a legal process through which an individual who is deemed by a qualified agent to have symptoms of severe mental disorder is detained in a psychiatric hospital (inpatient) where they can be treated involuntarily.

The rights of mental health patients in New Zealand are covered in law by both the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 and The Code of Health and Disability Service Consumers' Rights. Section 11 of the Bill of Rights Act states that "everyone has the right to refuse to undergo any medical treatment". However the Mental Health Act 1992 allows for the compulsory treatment of patients with major mental illness who do not consent. This legislation also allows for the detention and treatment of individuals who have committed crimes but who have either been deemed unfit to plead or have been found not guilty by reason of insanity.

<i>F.X. v The Clinical Director of Central Mental Hospital and Another</i> Irish Supreme Court case

F.X. v The Clinical Director of Central Mental Hospital and Another[2014] IESC 1; [2014] 1 IR 280 is a reported Irish Supreme Court case in which the court "clarified two important points about the habeas corpus jurisdiction":

  1. that the High Court's jurisdiction does lie in respect of detention orders made by courts of coordinate jurisdiction; and
  2. although the Constitution does not allow for stays to be placed on orders of habeas corpus, "orders can be made for controlling the release of persons who are incapable of protecting themselves."

References

  1. 1 2 3 "Mental Health Act 2007 (C. 12)". Archived from the original on 29 January 2009. Retrieved 6 February 2009.
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 http://www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_084597 Mental Health Act (1983): Code of Practice (Revised 2008)

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.