Procedural fairness in mental health review tribunals: the views of patient advocates

• Published in: Psychiatry, psychology, and law Vol. 28; no. 2; pp. 163 - 184
• Main Authors: Boyle, Sam, Walsh, Tamara
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Melbourne Routledge 01-04-2021; Australian Academic Press Group Pty Ltd
• Subjects: Attitudes; Fairness; Lawyers; Mental health; Mental health courts; mental health review tribunal; Mental illness; procedural fairness; Procedural justice; Tobacco smoke; Treatment; tribunal; Tribunals & commissions; AUSTRALIA; Queensland
• ISSN: 1321-8719; 1934-1687
• DOI: 10.1080/13218719.2020.1767715

Mental health review tribunals face the difficult task of balancing an obligation to be efficient and accessible against the obligation to provide procedural fairness. We conducted focus groups with lawyers and advocates who support people with matters before the Queensland Mental Health Review Tribunal to ascertain their views on issues relating to procedural fairness in this particular forum. Consistent with similar studies in other jurisdictions, our participants expressed concerns about how well informed their clients were about the proceedings, the probative value of the evidence relied upon and the extent to which medical evidence is effectively challenged. We analyse the concerns raised by our participants in light of the limited Australian case law on procedural fairness in mental health review tribunals.