Time to address inappropriate use of section 62 ‘urgent treatment’
Kirsty Sollitt Specialist registrar, The Yorkshire Centre for Forensic Psychiatry (Newton Lodge)
Suraj Shenoy Consultant forensic psychiatrist, The Yorkshire Centre for Forensic Psychiatry
A survey found lack of consistency in the use of section 62 of the Mental Health Act. Kirsty Sollitt and Suraj Shenoy believe a standard national form would help
There are concerns that urgent treatment under section 62 of the Mental Health Act 1983 is being used increasingly because of delays in getting a second opinion. It is therefore of paramount importance that section 62 is used and recorded appropriately. The Mental Health Act code of practice recommends that it should be the approved clinician in charge of treatment who decides what treatment is appropriate and completes the form.
The authors of this article surveyed trainee and consultant psychiatrists to ascertain their understanding of urgent treatment. Results showed the authorisation of urgent treatment was inconsistent and there was ambiguity about who should complete a section 62 form. These uncertainties highlight the need for a national standardised form.
Mental Health Practice. 18, 2, 26-29. doi: 10.7748/mhp.18.2.26.e935Correspondence
This article has been subject to double blind peer reviewConflict of interest
Received: 01 October 2013
Accepted: 04 December 2013