Interpreter mediation in statutory mental health assessments: A scoping review

Abstract

This interdisciplinary scoping review addresses the involvement of spoken and signed language interpreters in statutory mental health assessments. Specifically, this inquiry seeks to identify and review pre-existing literature concerning the barriers to and facilitators of effective practice in interpreter-mediated statutory mental health assessments, and the extent to which interpreter mediation supports or impedes a person’s legal rights and best interests in this context. An interdisciplinary team applied the revised Joanna Briggs Institute scoping review framework to review 44 items, including empirical and grey literature covering relevant aspects of the available body of knowledge across the fields of social work, mental health, and interpreting studies. The review concludes that there is a lack of direct evidence on interpreting practice in the context of statutory mental health assessments, which is significant considering the high-stakes scenarios that may lead to the deprivation of liberty. The findings suggest that there is insufficient evidence regarding necessary modifications to standard interpreting practices for such assessments, as well as how assessors should adapt their own practice in response to the need for interpreting. This work highlights the need for more focused research on good practices for interpreting within this context and calls for guidance to facilitate effective interprofessional collaboration between interpreters and other professionals engaged in these assessments.