This code of practice provides guidance to mental health professionals and other practitioners on how they should carry out their duties under the Mental Health Act. As well as providing guidance for professionals, the revised code of practice also guides patients, their families and carers on their rights. Chapters are grouped into seven areas: Using the Act; Protecting patient’s rights and autonomy; Assessment, transport and admission to hospital; Additional considerations for the needs of specific patients; Care, support and treatment in hospital; Leaving hospital; and additional information for professional with specific responsibilities under the Act. Subjects covered in individual chapters include: the nearest relative; independent mental health advocates; mental capacity and deprivation of liberty; detention in hospital; police community treatment orders; guardianship; after care; and care programme approach. The code of practice will come into force on 1 April 2015, depending on Parliamentary approval.

This annual report on CQC monitoring of the Mental Health Act (MHA) puts a specific focus on the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic has had on patients detained under the MHA, and on the services that care for and treat them. The findings indicate that: planning for individuals’ discharge from hospital continues to be essential and is particularly important during the pandemic period due to the increased burden on all services, including those in the community; some services showed exemplary practice in the co-production of care with patients, including infection control measures; in many services the physical environment requires modernisation and doing so would have the added positive impact of making infection control easier; some services continued to uphold restrictions on patients’ movement, activities and leave for longer than seemed necessary; many services invested in software to help detained patients to stay connected with their family and other sources of support during the pandemic; detained patients’ access to advocacy services was made more difficult during the pandemic, but such services played an even more crucial role where patients’ lives were more limited by infection control measures; there needs to be careful evaluation of using remote technology should aspects of them continue after the pandemic abates.