There are currently no changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 England and Wales (MHA). We'll keep this page updated as any changes and new guidance is developed.
NHS England/Improvement published Legal guidance for mental health, learning disability and autism, and specialised commissioning services supporting people of all ages during the coronavirus pandemic (second version, 19 May) on the impact of COVID-19 on the use of the MHA. See a summary of this guidance below. Future updates to this guidance are expected to include information on local enactment of emergency MHA provisions.
Legal guidance for mental health, learning disability and autism, and specialised commissioning services supporting people of all ages during the coronavirus pandemic has been published by NHS England/Improvement (second version 19 May) on the impact of COVID-19 on the use of the Mental Health Act 1983 (England and Wales). A summary of its contents is provided on this page.
Future updates to this guidance will be added to these pages and are expected to include information on local enactment of emergency MHA provisions.
- Currently no changes to the MHA and the MHA Code of Practice should be adhered to as it currently stands until further notice.
- Advice on using the MHA Code of Practice during the COVID-19 pandemic period has been provided by the Department of Health and Social Care (to offer specific advice and guidance on areas, which are posing a particular challenge as a result of the pandemic and where temporary departures from the Code of Practice may be justified in the interests of minimising risk to patients, staff, and the public
- MHA powers must not be used to enforce treatment or isolation for any reason unrelated to the management of a person’s mental health. For currently detained patients, providers should not impose blanket restrictions, but the use of the MHA may offer authority for enforcing social distancing and isolation of symptomatic patients. It is vital these powers are used with regard to the principles of the MHA Code of Practice.
- While the NHS and social care face unprecedented challenges relating to COVID-19, where possible overly restrictive practice must be guarded against
- Decisions about the application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and MHA have always involved significant nuance and complexity. During the COVID-19 outbreak, providers should follow organisational policies to ensure the safety of staff and patients, and decide on the appropriate relevant legal framework on a case-by-case basis, with reference to organisational ethics committees or ethics forums and support from medicolegal and expert social work olleagues as required.
- Robust, live communication across services is hugely important at this time. Digital technologies should be used to support communication.
Overview of contents
Operational considerations for the MHA (Section 4)
Areas where workforce shortages can be expected and suggested mitigating actions
Guidance on using the MHA Code of Practice during the COVID-19 pandemic period (Section 5 and Annex for full details)
- Section 136 assessment
- Approved Mental Health Professionals (AMHPs) and responsibilities of Local Authorities
- The role of hospital managers’ panel
- Mental Health Tribunal Hearings
- Medical Reviews of Seclusion
- Section 17 leave and visitors
- Access to Independent Mental Health Advocates (IMHAs)
- Second Opinion Appointed Doctors service
- Electronic forms and electronic delivery
Application of digital technology to Mental Health Act assessments (section 14)
- Minimum standards of technology and environment
- Taking into account a person’s views Safeguards and ensuring quality
- Checklist to support decision in line with the minimum standards and safeguards on the application of technology to the MHA assessments
- Specific considerations by setting
- Specific considerations by population
The Care Act (section 7)
Information on how emergency changes, if enacted, may impact on many people within mental health services and detained under the MHA, with rights under the Care Act.
Specific considerations regarding restraint, restrictive practice and the management of people who refuse to isolate (section 8)
The impact of COVID-19 may occasionally result in a justifiable need for restrictive practice in order to maintain both patient and staff safety. Providers must continue to use the least restrictive methods possible, inline with MHA and MCA Codes of Practice.
Any use of restriction must be proportionate to the risks involved, end as soon as possible and providers should refer to their ethics committees where required.
An increase in restrictive practice may result in psychological harm for patients, especially those with a history of trauma, and so it is important to consider what further support is in place for these individuals.
Decisions to increase forms of restrictive practice resulting from the impact of COVID-19 should also be documented.
Where it is necessary to increase restrictions, it is particularly important to make sure that inpatient environments provide sufficient meaningful activities and therapeutic interactions for people.
The role of safeguarding for people within mental health, learning disability and autism inpatient services must be considered, especially if restrictive practice is being used.
People from a black, Asian or other minority ethnic (BAME) group are more likely to be detained under the Mental Health Act, to be subject to restraint and restrictive practice, and to have worse outcomes from their care. It is therefore critical that during the COVID-19 pandemic period, services continue to use local data and information to identify if BAME people, under their care, are being disproportionately subject to restrictive practice and their work to address these inequalities should continue in partnership with experts by experience.
It is possible that an increased use of blanket restrictions will be required in some cases to maintain safe care where staffing levels are significantly impacted by COVID-19. Where identified as necessary and proportionate due to COVID-19, providers should continue to adhere to organisational polices regarding regular review of restrictions and documentation as to why they are necessary.
Managing the care of people with COVID-19
• Isolating patients due to suspected or confirmed COVID-19 in mental health settings may be challenging for all those involved, particularly where the patient refuses to be isolated.
Providers need to develop appropriate strategies to manage this safely to protect patients and staff from transmission and risk of physical injury within legal constraints, including their obligations under the Human Rights Act (1998).
Colleagues should determine appropriate use of the relevant legal framework on a case-by-case basis, with reference to organisational ethics committees and support from medicolegal colleagues as required (as above, it will be helpful to consult CQC’s brief guide on the use of ‘blanket restrictions’).
The key human right that is at risk when considering the management of people, who will not self-isolate, is the Right to Liberty, which is a limited right, and any restriction on this right has to be lawful, necessary and proportionate. NHS England and NHS Improvement and the CQC are working together – along with providers – to showcase legal and best practice frameworks to support and guide the provision of care in such circumstances; further detail will be made available in due cours
As specified in the guidance on providing care in inpatient settings for individuals with COVID-19, it is recommended that all inpatient settings should ‘cohort’ all patients into those:
− with confirmed COVID-19
− without confirmed COVID-19
− those who require admission and who are awaiting a test to confirm whether they have COVID-19
It is recognised that the need to cohort patients under these circumstances may mean that providers breach current guidance on delivering same-sex accommodation. They should then complete a full assessment of the implications for individuals.
Providers should consider the vulnerabilities of all patients they are caring for and make reasonable adjustments to care and support where required. Inpatient settings should reorganise wards/bays/en-suite facilities and staffing arrangements to separate these cohorts of patients, to maximise protection for the maximum number of patients. Specific local arrangements will need to be kept under regular review as the size and gender mix of these cohorts are likely to change over
Specific considerations for specialised commissioned services (section 10)
Adult and CAMHS secure services: including changes organisations can make now to how functions under MHA are discharged without changes in legislation such as virtual meetings and paper only managers’ hearings
High secure services: it may be necessary due to the implications of COVID for high secure services to derogate from the Safety and Security Directions
The Mental Health Casework Section published a Q&A for Healthcare Professionals (30 March)
CAMHS - all inpatient services: The emotional and behavioural responses of some children to constraints, uncertainties and significant changes to daily living due to COVID-19 may provide diagnostic challenges for assessment under the MHA. Advice from professionals with experience in children and young people’s mental health should be sought in such cases wherever possible.
Learning disability and autism services: if a person with a learning disability does not meet the specific behavioural criteria for detainment, non-compliance or difficulty in gaining compliance with any restrictions and interventions required for the management of COVID-19 is not interpreted as adequate grounds on which to detain them.
The emotional and behavioural responses of people with autism to the constraints, uncertainties and significant changes in daily living as a result of the management of COVID-19 may also provide a diagnostic challenge in assessments under the MHA.
Mental health and the criminal justice system: Where suspected and COVID-19 positive patients require transfer or remission as part of this pathway, these cases must be considered on an individual basis, taking into account both mental health and physical healthcare needs.
Specific considerations for people with dementia (section 12)
No blanket decisions on care and treatment should be made. Advance Care Planning (ACP) will help identify the wishes and preferences of people with dementia as described in My Future Wishes – check if the person with dementia has an ACP or a Health and Welfare Power of Attorney.
Specific considerations for mental health, learning disability and autism and the criminal justice system (section 13)
- Transfers and remissions to and from prisons/Immigration Removal Centre (IRCs) and mental health inpatient services
- Non-custodial mental health, learning disability and autism services
- Specific considerations for restricted patients
Because of the COVID-19 pandemic the CQC is reducing visits to hospitals to minimise risk to patients, staff, and the public, which includes the Second Opinion Appointed Doctor service.
NB SOAD processes under the MHA are different in Wales. RCPsych in Wales COVID-19 legal page has full details.
Summary of the new SOAD procedure:
- Mental health services to provide a summary of the patient’s current issues to CQC when submitting a second opinion request, which SOADs will use instead of visiting the hospital to examine care records.
- Consultations with professionals, including with the responsible clinician, will be undertaken by telephone or video (Skype or Microsoft teams).
- Following telephone consultations, the CQC will ask services to support patients who agree to speak with SOADs to have access to telephones or technology to support a video call with the SOAD.
- SOADs will not be asked to post original copies of certificates. The CQC encourages services to accept electronic copies of certificates and act on that. The Government may lift the requirement for a paper copy, and the CQC will issue further communications once this is confirmed.
NB. Please see other information on this page regarding potential changes to consent to treatment under the Mental Health Act which are made by the emergency COVID-19 legislation - but are not yet in force (these pages will be updated if they are).
Operation of Mental Health Tribunals in England will be changed for the next 6 months (beginning 23 March 2020) to limit the spread of COVID-19 and to allow tribunals to manage their workloads appropriately.
While the emergency Tribunal Practice Directions remain in force there will be no Tribunal hearings for CTO or Conditionally Discharged patients.
NB tribunal processes under the MHA are different in Wales. RCPsych in Wales COVID-19 legal page has full details.
The Senior President of the Mental Health Tribunal has issued an emergency practice direction to cover the next six months (during which time the changes will be reviewed and revoked should they become inappropriate or unnecessary).
Please read this message from Deputy Chamber President Sarah Johnston and Chief Medical Member Dr Joan Rutherford which sets out how clinical teams can help hearings proceed efficiently and reduce their own time at a hearing under the new procedures (doc).
All hearings will go ahead following the new procedure set out below:
Pre-Hearing Examinations (PHEs)
- Mental Health Tribunals will no longer be conducting Pre-Hearing Examinations (PHEs), as it is deemed not practicable to do so in the current environment.
- No medical member should conduct any further PHEs.
- If the booking has already been confirmed, from Monday 23 March 2020 the patients’ and clinical team will be attending the hearing by telephone only. No hearings will be in person.
- Any new cases will be listed before a single Judge (unless it is decided by the Chamber President or Deputy Chamber President that a two or three person panel is required).
- The single tribunal judge can seek the advice of one or more nonlegal members to assist with decision-making, provided the advice is recorded and disclosed to the parties.
Proceedings without a hearing
- Tribunal should suggest to the patient or their representative that proceedings be dealt with based on the papers in cases where: a reference has been made under s68 MHA )duty of managers of hospitals to refer cases to the tribunal); the patient is a community patient over 18; and, the patient agrees in writing that they do not require a hearing
For inpatient cases already listed
- Once received from the Tribunal office, the multi-disciplinary team (MDT) will be sent the telephone dial in details by the MHA office
- The MDT will dial in from a private office/ interview room. The MDT are not expected to be in the same room and may dial in from home if self-isolating.
- The patient will dial in from a private ward interview room, under the supervision of a member of the ward team
- The solicitor will dial in from their own office
- The solicitor may wish to talk with the patient privately before the hearing, to take their instructions for the hearing – this must be facilitated where possible
For Community Treatment Order cases already listed
- Once received from the Tribunal office, the Responsible Clinician (RC) and Care co-ordinator will be sent the telephone dial in details by the MHA office
- The RC and Care coordinator will dial in to the hearing from a private office/interview room. The MDT are not expected to be in the same room and this may be from home if you are self-isolating.
- Where possible, the patient will dial in from their placement – this will need to be facilitated by a member of staff at the community placement.
- If this is not practicable, the MHA office needs to be informed as soon as possible.
- The solicitor will dial in from their own office
- The solicitor may wish to talk with the patient privately before the hearing, to take their instructions for the hearing – this must be facilitated where possible
Communicating tribunal conclusions
It is suggested that the decision is not announced as the Judge will not be able to see the patient, witnesses of hearing room. The MHA office
will ensure that the patient and the MDT are notified of any official written decision as soon as we are able.
Any patient self-isolating, or who is suspected to be suffering from symptoms of the Corona Virus, would not be expected to take part in their hearing.
The MHA office must be informed immediately of any suspected cases, so that they can make alternative arrangements.
Temporary AC & S12(2) supplementary instructions (2020) have been issued, due to the current suspension of AC and S12(2) approval training to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19, which:
- allow approval extensions of 12 additional months for applicants whose cycle of approval is due to expire by 31 March 2021
- facilitate temporary reinstatement of AC or s12(2) approval where is has lapsed in the last 12 months.
Plans for online induction courses - sign up
We have been collaborating with Section 12(2) MHA and Approved Clinicians Approvals Panel Chairs in England to produce an induction course that can be delivered online.
Our initial proposal has been received positively and we are now developing the content. The plan is to deliver this in time for all those trainees entering ST4 in August to gain Section 12 (2) approval before they start work. If you are interested in attending the course please fill out our form.
Where an applicant is unable to attend required mandatory refresher training, their period of approval will be extended for 12 months - commencing from the expiration date of an applicant’s current period of approval. All existing renewing applicants (due to expire by 31 March 2021) should receive an updated approval outcome letter indicating the extended period of approval from their local board, commencing from the expiration date of an applicant’s current period of approval. If this has not been received from your local approval body, contact details can be found on the GOV.UK website.
Renewing applicants who have already attended an AC or S12(2) refresher course and can meet all requirements of the current AC & S12(2) Instructions (2015) will have their applications processed in the standard manner and approval will be awarded for a five year period.
A temporary 12 month reinstatement of AC or standalone S12(2) approval for those applicants whose period of approval lapsed within the previous 12 months (from 14 April 2020). Once ‘lapsed’ applications have been processed re-approval will last for 12 months commencing from the date of reinstatement. Recently lapsed applicants should directly contact their local approvals panel to request an application pack with supporting guidance.
Applicants must hold a current professional licence to practice and support their re-approval application with the following:
- Two professional references which meet the requirements of the current Secretary of State’s Instructions (2015) for AC or S12(2) approval.
- Evidence of CPD compliance - where current evidence is unavailable a panel will accept retrospective evidence of CPD compliance, valid up until the date of the expiration of the applicant’s last approval cycle.
NB These temporary measures relating to AC and S12(2) standalone approval do not extend to initial applications.
Guidance for health and social care staff who are caring for, or treating, a person who lacks the relevant mental capacity has been published by the Department of Health and Social Care: Mental Capacity Act and DoLS during COVID-19 pandemic
This guidance was updated on 29 May in relation to the use of emergency public health powers
A supplementary MCA/DoLS COVID-19 Q&A has also been published which covers:
- when can someone be tested for COVID-19 who lacks capacity to consent?
- what does lifesaving treatment mean?
- when does the provision of lifesaving treatment mean that the person is being deprived of their liberty?
- advance care plans
- the refusal of lifesaving treatment
- how should the acid test be interpreted?
- how can IMCAs and RPRs carry out their role?
- when does a DoLS authorisation need to be reviewed?
- how can the MCA principles be applied when a person is being discharged from hospital to a care home, in the context of ‘reduced choice’?
- changes in arrangements for those living outside of hospitals and care homes
- using previous DoLS assessments
- managing the demand for DoLS authorisations, assessments and reviews
- how to isolate someone if they lack capacity to consent
- how will emergency health powers be used if the person lacks the relevant capacity?
CHANGES NOT ARE CURRENTLY IN FORCE to mental health legislation in Scotland, Wales or England as a result of the emergency Coronavirus Act. Changes are only so far in place in Northern Ireland. These pages will be updated if this changes.
Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986 - changes are now in force. Visit RCPsych in Northern Ireland COVID-19 pages for more.
Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 - temporary changes in the Coronavirus Act 2020 are not yet in force and will not come into force until Scottish Ministers, on the basis of data and advice, commence provisions. Visit RCPsych in Scotland COVID-19 pages for more.
Mental Health Act 1983 England and Wales
The Coronavirus Act creates the ability for changes to be made to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA) so that certain functions relating to the detention and treatment of patients to be carried out with fewer doctors' opinions or certifications. It also temporarily allows for the extension or removal of certain time limits relating to the detention and transfer of patients.
While the emergency legislation has been passed the changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 are not currently in force. These emergency provisions will only be put in place when triggered by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. The College will keep members well informed if this does happen. Once triggered, such changes should only be applied locally where absolutely necessary due to extreme staff shortages. We expect to be able to share implementation guidance in due course.
Further information and guidance about local implementation will be provided here as soon as it is made available, this will include guidance on the operation of Mental Health Tribunals.
Until the measure are implemented in your area the existing legal guidance should be followed.
Quick read summary of changes to the MHA for clinicians
Section 5(4) - emergency detention power extended from 6 to 12 hours
Section 5(2) - emergency detention power extended from 72 to 120 hours. Can be any RMP (registered medical practitioner) or AC (approved clinician). Does not need to be the doctor or AC in charge of the patient’s care.
Sections 2 and 3 - one medical recommendation by a s12 approved doctor required, where involving two is impractical or would involve undesirable delay
Sections 135 and 136 – detention extended from 24 to 36 hours
Sections 35(7) and 36(6) extends the period a person accused of a crime can be remanded to hospital by removing the rule that a person cannot be remanded for more than 12 weeks in total. It will remain that a person cannot be remanded to hospital for more than 28 days at a time
Sections 36(1), 37(1), 38(1), 45A(3), 51(5) Courts can send an accused or convicted person to hospital on the advice of one doctor where involving two is impractical or would involve undesirable delay.
Sections 47(1) or 48(1) Secretary of State can make transfer to move person from prison to hospital on advice from one registered medical practitioner
Sections 35(9), 40 (1) and (3), 45B(1)removes time limits for taking an accused or convicted person to hospital after decision to admit, instead to be taken “as soon as is practicable”
Consent to treatment
Section 58(3)(b) - the Approved Clinician (AC) in charge of medical treatment can authorise treatment after 3 months for non-consenting/incapacitous patients if impractical or would involve undesirable delay to obtain view of SOAD (Second Opinion Appointed Doctor). AC Must carry out the required consultations but only needs to consult one other person, if complying with the requirement with two other persons is impractical or would involve undesirable delay.
Please see further details of the changes below
The Bill is designed to respond to the covid-19 pandemic and will expire after two years with the exception of the provisions relating to the power to award indemnity payments,.. To provide flexibility, clause 75, allows for the application of the Act to be extended (or shortened) by way of regulations made by a Minister of the Crown.
The Bill also amends the Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003, the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995, the Mental Health (Northern Ireland) Order 1986, the Mental Capacity Act (Northern Ireland) 2016
Overview of emergency changes to the Mental Health Act 1983 in the Coronavirus Bill
Schedule 7 - Part 2 Modifications of the Mental Health Act 1983 (England and Wales)
- Schedule 7 in full (pdf)
Paragraph 3 - Applications for compulsory admission to hospital for assessment or treatment- change from requiring two s12 doctors to only one s12 doctor
Normally applications by Approved Mental Health Professionals to detain patients must be supported by the recommendations of two doctors. However paragraph 3(1) allows for applications to contain only one such medical recommendation, if obtaining the advice of two doctors is either impractical or would unduly delay the application.
A single recommendation must otherwise comply with requirements of s2(3) or s3(3) MHA
An application founded on a single recommendation must include a
statement of the opinion
An emergency application under section 4 may not be founded on a single recommendation (but this does not limit section 4(3))
Section 11(7) (applications may be founded on separate or joint
recommendations) does not apply to an application founded on a single recommendation.
Section 12(1) has effect as if it required a single recommendation to be signed on or before the date of the application, and to be given by a practitioner who has personally examined the patient.
Section 12(2) has effect as if it required a single recommendation to be given by a practitioner approved for the purposes of that section by the Secretary of State as having special experience in the diagnosis or treatment of mental disorder (or by a person treated as so approved by virtue of section 12(2A)).
Section 12(1) and (2) do not otherwise apply to a single recommendation (and accordingly there is no requirement for the practitioner giving the recommendation to have previous acquaintance with the patient).
A single recommendation is subject to section 15(2) (except paragraph (b)) in the same way as one of two recommendations (and section 15(3) does not apply to it).
Paragraph 4 - Applications for compulsory admission of patients already in hospital – extending
Paragraph 4 changes section 5 of the MHA (which allows for the short-term detention of patients who are already in hospital) by extending the maximum period a patient can be detained under section 5 from 72 hours to 120 hours, and nurses’ holding powers would extend from 6 to 12 hours”
Para 4(1) Any registered medical practitioner or approved clinician may furnish a report for the purposes of section 5(2) (detention of patient in hospital 35 pending application for admission) if it appears that complying with the requirement under that provision for the report to be furnished by the practitioner or clinician in charge of the treatment of the patient is impractical or would involve undesirable delay.
Para 4 (2) Amends MHA Section 5(2) (period for which patient can be detained following report by practitioner or clinician) references to 72 hours detention in this section should be changed to 120 hours
Para 4 (3) Amends Section 5(4) MHA (period for which patient can be detained pending report by practitioner or clinician) references to 6 hours should be changed to 12 hours.
Paragraph 9 Administration of medicine to persons liable to detention in hospital
Changes the procedures around the administration of medication to detained patients without their consent, meaning that medication can be administered beyond three months without an opinion from a Second Opinion Appointed Doctor, where to follow usual procedure would be impractical or cause undesirable delay
Para 9 (1) The approved clinician in charge of treatment within s58(1)(b) (administration of medicine for more than three months) may give a certificate under s58(3)(b) (appropriateness of treatment without consent) if the clinician considers that complying with the requirement for the certificate to be given by another registered medical practitioner other than that clinician or the responsible clinician is impractical or would involve undesirable delay.
Para 9 (2) A registered medical practitioner or an approved clinician may give a certificate under section 58(3)(b) having consulted only one other person, if the practitioner (or clinician) considers that complying with the requirement under section 58(4) for consultation with two other persons is impractical or would involve
Para 9(3) The person consulted must have been professionally concerned with the patient’s medical treatment, and must not be a nurse, a registered medical practitioner, the responsible clinician or the approved clinician in charge of the
treatment in question.
Detention in place of safety
Paragraph 10 extends the time for which a person can be kept in a "place of safety" by a police officer under sections 135 and 136 of the MHA.
Para 10 In Sections 135(3ZA) and 136(2A) (period of detention in a place of safety)
136B (extension of detention) “24 hours” is to be substituted for “36 hours”.
Changes relating to Part Three of the Act - Patients in contact with the Criminal Justice System
Changes in paragraphs 5-8 reduce the number of doctors’ opinions required and modify time limits for detention and movement of people between court, prison and hospital. This will enable them to be admitted to hospital for treatment where there might otherwise be delay owing to shortage of qualified staff in a pandemic.
Period of remand to hospital
Para 5 – extends the period a person accused of a crime can be remanded to hospital under sections 35 and 36 MHA, by removing the rule that a person cannot be remanded for more than 12 weeks in total. It will remain the case that a person cannot be remanded to hospital for more than 28 days at a time.
Amending Sections 35(7) and 36(6) MHA: “on or for more than 12 weeks in all” to be omitted Court orders for the detention of accused or convicted persons in hospital
Para 6 applies to various sections of the MHA which allow a court to send an accused or convicted person to hospital. It provides that, in certain circumstances, courts can make such orders on the advice of one doctor rather than two.
Any power of a court under a provision, as listed below, may be exercised if the court—
(a) is satisfied that complying with the requirement for the evidence of two registered medical practitioners is impractical or would involve undesirable delay, and
(b) is satisfied on the evidence of a single registered medical practitioner
MHA Provisions relevant to para 6:
(a)s36(1) (power to remand accused person to hospital for treatment);
(b)s37(1) (power to order detention in hospital, or guardianship, of convicted person);
(c)s 38(1) (power to order interim detention of convicted person in hospital pending final hospital order or other disposal);
(d)s45A(3) (power to direct that a person sentenced to imprisonment be detained in hospital instead of prison) (only if the practitioner has given evidence orally before the court (and section 45A(4) accordingly does not apply).
(e)s51(5) (power to order detention of a person in hospital in the absence of the person).
Directions for the transfer of prisoners to hospital
Para 7 modifies the conditions under which the Secretary of State can make a "transfer direction", to move a serving prisoner or other type of detainee to hospital.
A transfer direction may be given under section 47(1) or 48(1) if the Secretary of State—
is satisfied that complying with the requirement that provision for reports from at least two registered medical practitioners is impractical or would involve undesirable delay, and is satisfied of the matters mentioned in a report from one registered medical practitioner, Conveyance of accused or convicted persons to hospital
Para 8 makes changes to the time limits imposed by the MHA for taking an accused or convicted person to hospital, following a decision to admit them. The changes remove existing time limits and instead allow the person to be taken to hospital “as soon as is practicable” after the normal limit expires.
Para 8 changes references to conveying or admitting a person to hospital within a specified period to references to doing so “within that period or as soon as practicable after the end of that period” in the following provisions:
(a)s35(9) (including as applied by section 36(8)) (remand in
(b)s40(1) and (3) (effect of hospital orders and interim hospital orders);
(c)s45B(1) (effect of hospital directions and limitation directions).
Para 8 applies, during a period for which it has effect, only in relation to a person for whom an order or direction is made after the beginning of that period.
Powers relating to potentially infectious persons “quarantine powers”
Clause 49 and Schedule 20
Certain powers are conferred on public health officers, constables and immigration officers to protect the public from the health risks associated with e COVID-19, including powers to require peope reasonably suspected to have COVID-19 to s go to a suitable place to undergo screening and assessment where they reasonably suspect the person has or may have covid-19
The provisions will apply in relation to England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, respectively.
The provisions confer powers on public health officers to require persons to go to suitable place to undergo screening and assessment where they reasonably suspect the person has or may have covid-19, or has been in an infected area within the 14 days preceding that time. Such persons are referred to in the provisions as "potentially infectious" persons.
There are additional powers for public health officers to impose other appropriate restrictions and requirements upon potentially infectious persons where they are necessary and proportionate, such as a requirement to remain in isolation, restrictions on travel, activities and contact with other people. The provisions also confer powers on public health officers and constables to enforce the restrictions and requirements imposed under the schedule.
Public health officer” means—an officer of the Secretary of State designated by the Secretary of State for any or all of the purposes of this Schedule, or a registered public health consultant so designated
The clause and schedule certain powers on immigration officers and constables in relation to persons whom they have reasonable grounds to suspect as being potentially infectious. An immigration officer or a constable may direct such a person to go to a place suitable for screening and assessment, or may remove a person to such a place to undergo screening and assessment, or to keep that person there for a time-limited period to be handed over to a public health officer for the same purpose. In exercising their powers under these provisions, immigration officers and constables will be obliged to consult a public health officer, so far as practicable to do so.
For an update on the new ways of working for Mental Health Tribunals, please see this update from Deputy Chamber President Sarah Johnston and Chief Medical Member Dr Joan Rutherford.