Mental health homicide inquiries in England 2010–2023: review of methodology and findings

Mayura Deshpande, Julia M. A. Sinclair, Zoe Tebbs, David S. Baldwin
{"title":"Mental health homicide inquiries in England 2010–2023: review of methodology and findings","authors":"Mayura Deshpande, Julia M. A. Sinclair, Zoe Tebbs, David S. Baldwin","doi":"10.1192/bjp.2025.65","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<span>Background</span><p>The methodology and impact of independent inquiries of homicides by people in care of mental health services have been questioned.</p><span>Aims</span><p>To analyse characteristics of patients who committed homicide, their victims and inquiries published in England between 2010 and 2023.</p><span>Method</span><p>Documentary and thematic analysis of 162 mental health homicide inquiries. We compared characteristics of perpetrators with those from the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety (2018), and characteristics of victims with those in the general population of England and Wales. We examined methodology used by inquiries and thematically analysed root causes, contributory factors, recommendations, action plans, predictability and preventability.</p><span>Results</span><p>Fifty-two per cent of perpetrators had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and 52% had a history of non-adherence to medication and follow-up; 71% of victims in mental health homicides were family, friends or partners compared with 44% in the general population; 77% of inquiries used no clear methodology. The most frequent root causes and contributory factors related to deficits in assessment, treatment, follow-up or discharge, and risk assessment. There was no direct link between putative causes and resulting recommendations. The most frequent recommendations related to changing policy, improving clinical governance and training. Only 4% of inquiries deemed the homcide to be predictable and preventable.</p><span>Conclusions</span><p>There is considerable variation in the methodology of mental health homicide inquiries, with little use of human factors and systems theory. Inquiries repeatedly identify the same themes, and most mental health homicides are found to be neither predictable nor preventable. We make recommendations for improving consistency and usefulness.</p>","PeriodicalId":22495,"journal":{"name":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","volume":"80 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The British Journal of Psychiatry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.2025.65","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The methodology and impact of independent inquiries of homicides by people in care of mental health services have been questioned.

Aims

To analyse characteristics of patients who committed homicide, their victims and inquiries published in England between 2010 and 2023.

Method

Documentary and thematic analysis of 162 mental health homicide inquiries. We compared characteristics of perpetrators with those from the National Confidential Inquiry into Suicide and Safety (2018), and characteristics of victims with those in the general population of England and Wales. We examined methodology used by inquiries and thematically analysed root causes, contributory factors, recommendations, action plans, predictability and preventability.

Results

Fifty-two per cent of perpetrators had a diagnosis of schizophrenia and 52% had a history of non-adherence to medication and follow-up; 71% of victims in mental health homicides were family, friends or partners compared with 44% in the general population; 77% of inquiries used no clear methodology. The most frequent root causes and contributory factors related to deficits in assessment, treatment, follow-up or discharge, and risk assessment. There was no direct link between putative causes and resulting recommendations. The most frequent recommendations related to changing policy, improving clinical governance and training. Only 4% of inquiries deemed the homcide to be predictable and preventable.

Conclusions

There is considerable variation in the methodology of mental health homicide inquiries, with little use of human factors and systems theory. Inquiries repeatedly identify the same themes, and most mental health homicides are found to be neither predictable nor preventable. We make recommendations for improving consistency and usefulness.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
2010-2023年英格兰心理健康杀人案调查:方法和调查结果审查
背景对精神健康服务护理人员杀人事件进行独立调查的方法和影响一直受到质疑。目的分析2010年至2023年间英格兰杀人患者、其受害者和发布的调查报告的特征。方法对162份精神健康杀人调查报告进行文献和主题分析。我们将肇事者的特征与《全国自杀与安全保密调查报告》(2018 年)中的特征进行了比较,并将受害者的特征与英格兰和威尔士普通人群的特征进行了比较。我们研究了调查所使用的方法,并对根本原因、促成因素、建议、行动计划、可预测性和可预防性进行了专题分析。结果52%的肇事者被诊断为精神分裂症,52%的肇事者有不坚持服药和复诊的历史;71%的精神健康凶杀案受害者是家人、朋友或伴侣,而普通人群中这一比例为44%;77%的调查没有使用明确的方法。最常见的根本原因和促成因素与评估、治疗、随访或出院以及风险评估方面的缺陷有关。推测原因与最终建议之间没有直接联系。最常见的建议涉及改变政策、改善临床管理和培训。只有 4%的调查认为凶杀案是可以预测和预防的。结论:心理健康凶杀案的调查方法存在很大差异,很少使用人为因素和系统理论。调查反复确定相同的主题,大多数心理健康凶杀案被认为既不可预测也不可预防。我们提出了改进一致性和实用性的建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Predicting early clinical recovery in first-episode psychosis: development and external validation of a clinically interpretable multivariable model. Psychiatric genetics research in Africa: challenges, opportunities and strategic insights from the Depression Genetics in Africa (DepGenAfrica) study. Risk and protective factors against burnout increase during psychiatry training: evidence from a longitudinal multicentre controlled study. Risks and benefits of probabilistic suicide risk tools: commentary, Fazel et al. A clinician's guide to probabilistic suicide risk prediction tools.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1