Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Limits of remote working: the ethical challenges in conducting Mental Health Act assessments during COVID-19
  1. Lisa Schölin1,
  2. Moira Connolly1,
  3. Graham Morgan1,
  4. Laura Dunlop2,
  5. Mayura Deshpande3,
  6. Arun Chopra1
  1. 1 Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, Edinburgh, UK
  2. 2 Mental Health Tribunal for Scotland, Hamilton, UK
  3. 3 Southern Health NHS Foundation Trust, Southampton, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Arun Chopra, Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, Edinburgh EH12 5HE, UK; arun.chopra2{at}


COVID-19 has created additional challenges in mental health services, including the impact of social distancing measures on care and treatment. For situations where a detention under mental health legislation is required to keep an individual safe, psychiatrists may consider whether to conduct an assessment in person or using video technology. The Mental Health (Care and Treatment) (Scotland) Act 2003 does not stipulate that an assessment has to be conducted in person. Yet, the Code of Practice envisions that detention assessments would be conducted face to face in all circumstances. During the pandemic, the Mental Welfare Commission for Scotland, a statutory body with a duty to promote best practice of the Act, has been asked whether it may be acceptable and indeed preferable for some assessments to be conducted via video technology. Where an assessment is needed to determine if a patient needs to be detained, and where there is a need for social distancing or the need for ‘shielding’, remote assessments may in some circumstances be preferable. In this article, we outline the modification of the Mental Welfare Commission’s previous outright rejection of virtual assessments as the pandemic progressed and discuss the ethical and legal issues the possibility of remote assessments has exposed. We also discuss the limits and when a virtual assessment is not considered ethical. As the pandemic moves from a state of emergency into a ‘new normal’ in psychiatric services during second, or subsequent, waves, the use and place (if any) of remote assessments for detention needs to be considered.

  • COVID-19
  • mentally ill and disabled persons
  • legal aspects
  • psychiatry

Data availability statement

There are no data in this work.

This article is made freely available for use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Data availability statement

There are no data in this work.

View Full Text


  • Twitter @lesaangelica

  • Contributors The concept for this article was developed by AC. LS coordinated the development of the manuscript. AC, MC, GM, LD and MD contributed to, edited and approved the final version of the article.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

  • Author note Author Laura Dunlop has commented on this paper in personal capacity.

Other content recommended for you