Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41911214›Full record

ArticlePLOS mental health2026

Stigma, race, and testimonial injustice in mental health detention: Professionals experience of Compulsory Assessment and Treatment under The Mental Health Act 1983.

Caroline Leah, Jeremy Dixon, Elaine Craig, Kim Heyes, Debbie Best, Anna Bergqvist, Alina Haines-Delmont

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS mental health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Caroline LeahDepartment of Social Care and Social Work, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6659-7848
Jeremy DixonCentre for Adult and Social Care Research (CARE), Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Elaine CraigSchool of Nursing and Public Health, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4252-3956
Kim HeyesSchool of Nursing and Public Health, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9029-545X
Debbie BestSchool of Nursing and Public Health, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Anna BergqvistSchool of History, Politics and Philosophy, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.
Alina Haines-DelmontSchool of Nursing and Public Health, Manchester Metropolitan University, Manchester, United Kingdom.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6989-0943

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article examines how stigma, racism, and epistemic injustice shape health and social care professionals' experiences of Compulsory Assessment and Treatment (CAT) within mental health and policing systems, with particular attention to the racialised experiences of Black men. Despite longstanding recognition of institutional racism and structural inequality, the persistent over‑detention of Black men under mental health legislation remains inadequately addressed. This study advances the field by shifting focus from procedural reform to epistemic critique, analysing how credibility, knowledge, and understanding are unevenly distributed, racialised, and denied within CAT practices. Drawing on a multi‑method Experience-Based Co‑Design (EBCD) study, the article reports qualitative findings from interviews with 13 mental health professionals, an EBCD feedback event, and a co‑design workshop involving 46 participants. Centring experiential knowledge, the analysis applies reflexive thematic methods informed by epistemic injustice, Critical Race Theory, stigma inequality, and the Silences Framework. Three themes are identified: (i) Racial Stereotyping and Risk Assessment, (ii) Stigma and the Denial of Care, and (iii) Race Anxiety and Colour-blind Racism. These findings illustrate how racialised framings within CAT generate both testimonial and hermeneutical injustice, silencing Black men's voices and rendering their experiences unintelligible within dominant professional paradigms. The analysis makes a significant scholarly and practical contribution by demonstrating that stigma functions as a structural and institutional logic shaping professional decision‑making. Meaningful change therefore requires systemic transformation, rather than a narrow focus on individual professional attitudes. The article calls for greater epistemic openness, urging professionals to recognise the limits of dominant frameworks and to incorporate lived experience and community‑based knowledge into practice. By reframing mental health and policing practices through an epistemic lens, the study identifies a transformative route toward more equitable, accountable, and just systems. Although situated in the UK, the insights have broader relevance for global mental health systems confronting racialised exclusion and structural inequity.

Identifiers

PMID41911214
PMCPMC13035139

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.