Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Serious Incident Inquiries: a survival kit for psychiatrists

  • Mark Salter (a1)
Extract

Since 1999, a formal external inquiry into every homicide committed by a person with a mental disorder has been mandatory in the UK (Department of Health, 1994). Common opinion among psychiatrists is that Serious Incident Inquiries are unhelpful as they all reach similar conclusions, add nothing to our current knowledge and do more harm than good in terms of adverse publicity for mental health services (Buchanan, 1999). Despite this, there is presently little sign of a change in public policy. Psychiatrists continue to face the fact that the next incident could be ‘the one that's coming here’. Although the many flaws of the inquiry process have been well described (Szmukler, 2000), few have interpreted this knowledge in a way that is of practical help to a psychiatrist facing an inquiry.

  • View HTML
    • Send article to Kindle

      To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

      Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

      Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

      Serious Incident Inquiries: a survival kit for psychiatrists
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Dropbox

      To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

      Serious Incident Inquiries: a survival kit for psychiatrists
      Available formats
      ×
      Send article to Google Drive

      To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

      Serious Incident Inquiries: a survival kit for psychiatrists
      Available formats
      ×
Copyright
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
References
Hide All
Bolam versus Friern Hospital Management Committee [1957] 2 AII ER, 118.
Buchanan, A. (1999) Independent inquiries into homicide. BMJ, 318, 10891090.
Clunis versus Camden and Islington Health Authority [1998] 3 AII ER, 180.
Department of Health (1989a) Caring for People: Community Care in the Next Decade and Beyond. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (1989b) Working for Patients. London: HMSO.
Department of Health (1994) Guidance on the Discharge of Mentally Disordered People and Their Continuing Care in the Community. London: Department of Health.
Department of Health and Social Security (1972) White Paper on National Health Service Reorganisations. London: HMSO.
Department of Health and Social Security (1975) Better Services for the Mentally Ill. London: HMSO.
Eastman, N. (1996) Inquiry into homicides by psychiatric patients: systematic audit should replace mandatory inquiries. BMJ, 313, 10691071.
Fitzpatrick, M. (2001) The Tyranny of Health. London: Routledge.
Hawkins, S. & Hastie, R. (1990) Hindsight: biased judgements of past events after the outcomes are known. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 311327.
Howlett, M. (2001) Commentary: the limits of responsibility. Psychiatric Bulletin, 25, 414415.
Ministry of Health (1962) Hospital Plan for England and Wales. London: HMSO.
Oyebode, F. (1999) Invited commentary: anatomy of risk. Psychiatric Bulletin, 23, 652656.
Peay, J. (1996) Themes and questions: the inquiry in context. In Inquiries after Homicide (ed. Peay, J.). London: Duckworth.
Philo, G., Secker, J., Platt, S., et al (1994) Impact of the mass media on public images of mental illness: media content and audience belief. Health Education Journal, 53, 271281.
Reiss, D. (2001) Counterfactuals and inquiries after homicide. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry, 12, 169181.
Scotland, Baroness, Kelly, H., Devaux, M. (1998) The Report of the LukeWarm Luke Mental Health Inquiry (Vols I and II). London: Lambeth and Lewisham Health Authority.
Stewart, G. (2001) Key Dates in the History of Mental Health Care. MIND Factsheet. London: MIND Information Unit.
Sutherland, S. (1992) Irrationality, p. 236. London: Penguin.
Szmukler, G. (2000) Homicide Inquiries. What sense do they make? Psychiatric Bulletin, 24, 610.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

BJPsych Bulletin
  • ISSN: 0955-6036
  • EISSN: 1472-1473
  • URL: /core/journals/bjpsych-bulletin
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 6 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 44 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 2nd January 2018 - 18th July 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Serious Incident Inquiries: a survival kit for psychiatrists

  • Mark Salter (a1)
Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *