title: Doctors on tribunals. A confusion of roles.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Mental health review tribunals are required to apply legal criteria within a clinical context. This can create tensions within both law and psychiatry.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To examine the role of the medical member of the tribunal as a possible mediator between the two disciplines.
  
  
  METHODS
  Observation of tribunal hearings and panel deliberations and interviews with tribunal members were used to describe the role of the medical member.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The dual roles imposed on the medical member as witness and decision-maker and as doctor and legal actor create formal demands and ethical conflicts that are hard, in practice, either to meet or to resolve.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The structure for providing tribunals with access to expert psychiatric input and advice requires reconsideration.
authors.affiliation: Department of Law, Queen Mary and Westfield College, University of London.
authors.forename: G
authors.initials: G
authors.lastname: Richardson
authors.forename: D
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Machin
mesh_terms: D003134:Commitment of Persons with Psychiatric Disorders / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D003220:Conflict, Psychological; D004992:Ethics, Medical; D005104:Expert Testimony; D006801:Humans; D008503:Medical Staff / Q000523:psychology*; D010351:Patient Discharge / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence; D010819:Physician's Role; D011570:Psychiatry; D006113:United Kingdom