can you assist with this query related to Pt 3 (forensic) of MHA? S38 (3) states “at least one of the registered medical practitioners whose evidence is taken into account…shall be employed at the hospital which is to be specified in the order”
I have liaised with the other practitioners in courts elsewhere in the UK and had a discussion with psychiatrists. I have been told that the second recommendation does not necessarily need to be a doctor working at the proposed treating hospital, and it can be another doctor working within the same trust (who has liaised with the bed managers of the hospital where the proposed treatment will take place, to ensure that a bed is available within the set time frame).
The conflict of interest regulations only apply to Part II applications, so there’s nothing in the Act or Regs that can preclude a court from being “satisfied” about making a s.38 order on the basis of evidence from two doctors from the same hospital / team / whatever.
Section 38 has a requirement about one of the doctors, and about the evidence, but no requirement about the second doctor.
(3) At least one of the registered medical practitioners whose evidence is taken into account under subsection (1) above shall be employed at the hospital which is to be specified in the order.
(4) An interim hospital order shall not be made for the admission of an offender to a hospital unless the court is satisfied, on the written or oral evidence of the approved clinician who would have overall responsibility for his case or of some other person representing the managers of the hospital, that arrangements have been made for his admission to that hospital and for his admission to it within the period of 28 days beginning with the date of the order; and if the court is so satisfied the court may, pending his admission, give directions for his conveyance to and detention in a place of safety.
Chapter 18 of the Reference Guide deals with interim hospital orders and has a good chart setting it all out.