Speaking with different voices: the problems with English law and psychiatric injury

Private law courts in the UK have maintained the de minimis threshold as a condition precedent for a successful claim for the infliction of mental harm. This de minimis threshold necessitates the presence of a ‘recognised psychiatric illness’ as opposed to ‘mere emotion’. This standard has also been adopted by the criminal law courts when reading the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 to include non-physical injury. In determining the cut-off point between psychiatric injury and mere emotion, the courts have adopted a generally passive acceptance of expert testimony and the guidelines used by mental health professionals to make diagnoses. Yet these guidelines were developed for use in a clinical setting, not a legal one. This article examines the difficulty inherent in utilising the ‘dimensional’ diagnostic criteria used by mental health professionals to answer ‘categorical’ legal questions. This is of particular concern following publication of the new diagnostic manual, DSM-V in 2013, which will further exacerbate concerns about compatibility. It is argued that a new set of diagnostic guidelines, tailored specifically for use in a legal context, is now a necessity.

A novel framework for predicting patients at risk of readmission

Uncertainty in decision-making for patients’ risk of re-admission arises due to non-uniform data and lack of knowledge in health system variables. The knowledge of the impact of risk factors will provide clinicians better decision-making and in reducing the number of patients admitted to the hospital. Traditional approaches are not capable to account for the uncertain nature of risk of hospital re-admissions. More problems arise due to large amount of uncertain information. Patients can be at high, medium or low risk of re-admission, and these strata have ill-defined boundaries. We believe that our model that adapts fuzzy regression method will start a novel approach to handle uncertain data, uncertain relationships between health system variables and the risk of re-admission. Because of nature of ill-defined boundaries of risk bands, this approach does allow the clinicians to target individuals at boundaries. Targeting individuals at boundaries and providing them proper care may provide some ability to move patients from high risk to low risk band. In developing this algorithm, we aimed to help potential users to assess the patients for various risk score thresholds and avoid readmission of high risk patients with proper interventions. A model for predicting patients at high risk of re-admission will enable interventions to be targeted before costs have been incurred and health status have deteriorated. A risk score cut off level would flag patients and result in net savings where intervention costs are much higher per patient. Preventing hospital re-admissions is important for patients, and our algorithm may also impact hospital income.