Skip to content

Mental health and the law: Time to re-examine the legacy of Hillsborough

A case brought by ten victims of the Hillsborough disaster laid down a legal precedent founded on hugely misguided assumptions about psychological injury. That may be about to change.

Published:
 John Giles / PA Archive/Press Association Images. All rights reserv
John Giles / PA Archive/Press Association Images. All rights reserv

Mourners at a Hillsborough Memorial service in 2009. Photo: John Giles / PA Archive/Press Association Images. All rights reservedLast October, a ‘Negligence and Damages’ bill was introduced to parliament. The bill challenges an entrenched hierarchy in the law whereby damages for physical injury inflicted through the negligence of a third party are easier to obtain than if those injuries are psychological. The bill's progress into law has stagnated, but if it passes it promises to transform how the law regards trauma and psychological harm.

In challenging this hierarchy, the bill reflects changing attitudes toward mental health in Britain. A 2015 survey by King’s College London found that ninety-one percent of britons agree that mental illness merits increased recognition amongst society. Nevertheless, a historical lag exists between changing social attitudes and case law. Whilst our attitudes are now of the modern era, the referent point underpinning the law’s approach to psychological injury is still found in 1989 and the events of Hillsborough. 

Though Hillsborough is remembered primarily for the physical injuries it saw, it also inflicted psychological damage. Family members in different sections of the stadium to their loved ones watched helplessly as the crush developed in the lower tier of the Leppings Lane stand. Broadcast live on television and radio, the trauma was transmitted directly to thousands who had family at the game. Hours after waving away family members, next of kin identified their bodies.