It seems fashionable these days to combine the written word with an audiovisual presentation, particularly in the field of professional education and this offering is a fairly recent example. As a now retired, long-serving, lay member of the mental health review tribunal (MHRT), I was interested to see what this combined product had to offer. However, before doing so, a word or two concerning the context may be helpful. When the Human Rights Act came into force in October 2000, it was hailed by the Government as an important means of giving citizens the right to challenge the activities of the State through the courts. At the time of its inception, some mental health lawyers thought the impact of the Act would provide considerable opportunities for challenge (a view put forward in the video). A more balanced view indicated that if tribunals followed the ‘rules’ correctly, little litigation would be likely to ensue. This seems to have been the case, since (as far as I have been able to ascertain informally) only a few cases await judicial review and these seem mainly concerned with matters of interpretation, disclosure and delays. The booklet, of some 30 pages, to be read in conjunction with the video, deals with ‘The Law of European Convention’; ‘Possible Challenges’; ‘Possible Defences’; ‘Relevant Parts of the Human Rights Act’; ‘Schedule 1 of the Act’ and ‘Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights’. I found the section devoted to the Law of the European Convention the most interesting. The other sections will be of most interest (and comprehension) to lawyers! I viewed the video in the company of my daughter (who is a lawyer, but does not specialise in mental health law) and her partner, who is a retired educationalist. The copy we received was of poor sound quality (I tried it on two different video machines to make sure it was the video and not the equipment). The introductory musical ‘jingle’ was very off-putting. However, for the most part, the presentation by four professionals (three experienced lawyers and an advocacy manager) was competent enough and easy to ‘access.’ However, the production's biggest weakness was the fact that it was made prior to the actual implementation of the Act. It therefore really needs updating. Even allowing for the high cost of producing professional videos, it is very expensive. I do not imagine individuals will think they can afford it for their personal use, but training bodies may feel they should buy it — allowing for budgetary constraints. The pack is not without its merits and I shall probably donate mine to our regional tribunal office as a belated leaving present — I retired a year ago!