I spent some time recently in good company on my old policing patch where I worked as as sergeant – assisting with CPD for psychiatrists in Birmingham & Solihull and it was most agreeable. One of the other speakers – a solicitor I know who specialises in mental health law – grabbed me during a break to ask about the new arrangements for what will be called “supervised discharge“.
This term refers to a new “sub-set” of ‘conditional discharge‘ under s42 MHA.
The new name reflects situations which can only occur following the 2025 amendments to the Mental Health Act 1983 (MHA), which allows conditions to be placed on discharge which include a “deprivation of liberty”, under s42(2A) MHA. “CD-DEP” is an emerging shorthand term for this new type of conditional discharge where it includes a deprivation.
Supervised discharge = CD-DEP.
This is all covered in the first tranche of the 2025 MHA amendments to become law and it took effect on the 18th February 2026. Police officers and call handlers may now hear discussion which involves suggestion of them doing something about ‘supervised discharge’ or ‘CD-DEP’ gone awry.
CALL THE POLICE
I don’t propose to go in to what is or isn’t a ‘deprivation of liberty in these circumstances because all of that is a matter for the NHS and the Ministry of Justice when they are deciding to discharge a forensic patient from hospital. They can make the choice about whether to authorise the older style conditional discharge or opt for this new category of supervised discharge where there is a deprivation. It will mean that in some way shape or form, the patient is residing somewhere and in conditions where they are under “continuous supervision, control and unable to leave” and that’s about all you need to know.
That is the so-called ‘acid test’ for a deprivation of liberty.
The Department of Health & Social Care has issued has issued guidance which touches upon what those who supervise forensic patients should do if the person leaves their location of residence or absconds from escort whilst away from it.
Yes, you’re ahead of me – the advice is “alert the police”. The government’s “Supervised Discharge FAQs” contains the following question and answer –
Q23. What can be done if a patient is planning to leave their accommodation without supervision?
A23. Accommodation staff should be aware that if a patient decides to leave the accommodation the usual procedures of alerting the Police and following the processes set out in the patient’s care plan must be undertaken. Accommodation staff should make the patient aware that they are likely to be recalled to hospital if they choose to leave. Staff must also contact the community team as soon as possible who will discuss recall with MHCS. If a recall has been authorised the patient is immediately liable to be returned to hospital.
THE LAW AND RECALL
Whilst the Mental Health Act 2025 has introduced this new category of conditional discharge, it has done absolutely nothing at all to change or add to the recall mechanisms in section 42 MHA. The old process to recall a conditionally discharged patient was for the care provider to contact the Ministry of Justice – something they can do 24hrs a day, if need be – and request urgent authorisation for a recall warrant. If the MoJ, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, agrees recall is appropriate, they can issue a warrant under s42(4) MHA which then allows the police to re-detain the patient.
In fairness to the points I’m about to make, it’s relevant to point out it’s not just the police who can re-detain someone who has been recalled – anyone listed in s18 MHA can do so because a recalled patient is treated “as if” they are Absent Without Leave under that section and AWOL powers do not just sit with the police but you may find agencies looking to the police because of the risks involved with restricted, forensic patients who are not compliant with conditions on their discharge.
You may be ahead of me already: if a supervised patient “absconds” from the deprivation of liberty within their supervised discharge, they are not immediately AWOL. The same s42(4) process would need to be followed for the MoJ to recall that patient to hospital, if they thought it were justified but in the time that it may take to achieve the recall warrant, the person previously labelled by a criminal court of posing “a risk of serious harm” to the public and no legal power to re-detain them unless powers under s136 MHA can be applied.
CALL HANDLING
One problem to be anticipated here – and it’s an important one given the nature of the risks at stake – is the police reaction to being contacted about a supervised discharge gone awry. Will the call handler know what’s at stake and ask the right questions to understand risk? – I would hope the caller would explain the situation clearly because of how rare this will be and how high the likelihood a call handler will not have heard of this new framework, but we can’t know they will explain it.
I would be hoping they would say something like this –
“This report relates to a supervised discharge patient, which is a new kind of legal order you may not have heard about. It can only apply to patients who have been through the criminal justice system for serious matters and been deemed to pose a “risk of serious harm”. They have since been hospitalised in a secure unit and are now being closely supervised in the community but have breached the supervision conditions on their discharge and whilst we do not yet have a warrant from the Ministry of Justice for their recall, police powers under s136 MHA can be considered if the person is found before we have the warrant.
Given the risk background here, we submit this is appropriate for the police because there is an immediate risk of serious harm in this situation until they are detained and as soon as we have a warrant we will call you back to confirm this and we are urgently seeking it now. Delayed action because of us still seeking a warrant is a real and serious risk you might want to consider very carefully indeed and if I were you, I’d refer this to a supervisor and do proper background checks on the person before you make any decision.”
Or something similar.
Supervised discharge: it will be comparatively rare the recall situation comes up as it’s already rare that conditional discharge comes up and there will be fewer examples of the newer order and that’s why force mental health leads need to know about this and ensure systems are capable of recognising these calls when they come because a failure to act would be difficult to explain.
Awarded the President’s Medal, by
the Royal College of Psychiatrists.
Winner of the Mind Digital Media Award
All opinions expressed are my own – they do not represent the views of any organisation.
(c) Michael Brown, 2026
I am not a police officer.
I try to keep this blog up to date, but inevitably over time, amendments to the law as well as court rulings and other findings from inquests and complaints processes mean it is difficult to ensure all the articles and pages remain current. Please ensure you check all legal issues in particular and take appropriate professional advice where necessary.
Government legislation website – www.legislation.gov.uk
Mental Health Cop 