• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

影响与强制:针对强制精神治疗的关系型与基于权利的伦理方法

Influence and coercion: relational and rights-based ethical approaches to forced psychiatric treatment.

作者信息

Olsen D P

机构信息

Center for Health Policy and Ethics, Yale University School of Nursing, New Haven, CT 06536-0740, USA.

出版信息

J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2003 Dec;10(6):705-12. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2850.2003.00659.x.

DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2850.2003.00659.x
PMID:15005484
Abstract

The dominant rights-based approach to the ethics of coercion in psychiatric treatment guides clinicians in deciding whether treatment should be compelled or the patient's autonomy respected, but provides no guidance across the remaining broad continuum of influence that clinicians exert with patients. The assumptions of the rights-based approach lead to three dichotomous decisions: (1) 'Is the treatment voluntary?'; (2) 'Is the patient competent?' and (3) 'Are the consequence of no treatment dangerous?'. The assumptions of a relational approach lead to ethical guidance across the full range in the intensity and types of influence which may be ethically justified or required in psychiatric treatment. These assumptions are: (1) influence is inherent in the clinical relationship; (2) the relevant factors are continuous and (3) all decisions are subjective. While the rights-approach emphasizes defining competence and developing techniques to predict future patient dangerousness, the relational approach emphasizes patient-clinician responsibilities in ethical relationships and understanding all factors which legitimately bear on the use of influence. An initial list of such factors is offered.

摘要

精神科治疗中基于权利的强制伦理主导方法指导临床医生决定是否应强制治疗或尊重患者自主权,但对于临床医生对患者施加的其余广泛影响范围却没有提供指导。基于权利的方法的假设导致三个二分法决策:(1)“治疗是自愿的吗?”;(2)“患者有行为能力吗?”以及(3)“不治疗的后果危险吗?”。关系方法的假设为精神科治疗中可能在伦理上合理或必要的影响强度和类型的整个范围提供伦理指导。这些假设是:(1)影响在临床关系中是固有的;(2)相关因素是连续的;(3)所有决策都是主观的。虽然基于权利的方法强调界定行为能力并开发预测患者未来危险性的技术,但关系方法强调伦理关系中患者与临床医生的责任以及理解所有合法影响影响使用的因素。本文提供了此类因素的初步清单。

相似文献

1
Influence and coercion: relational and rights-based ethical approaches to forced psychiatric treatment.影响与强制:针对强制精神治疗的关系型与基于权利的伦理方法
J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2003 Dec;10(6):705-12. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2850.2003.00659.x.
2
Beneficial Coercion in Psychiatric Care: Insights from African Ethico-Cultural System.精神科护理中的有益强制:来自非洲伦理文化体系的见解
Dev World Bioeth. 2018 Jun;18(2):91-97. doi: 10.1111/dewb.12137. Epub 2016 Dec 19.
3
The convention on human rights and biomedicine and the use of coercion in psychiatry.《人权与生物医学公约》及精神病学中强制手段的使用。
J Med Ethics. 2004 Oct;30(5):430-4. doi: 10.1136/jme.2002.000703.
4
Ethics of deliberation, consent and coercion in psychiatry.精神病学中审议、同意与强制的伦理问题。
J Med Ethics. 2008 Feb;34(2):73-6. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.019695.
5
Coercion in psychiatric care: can paternalism justify coercion?精神科护理中的强制:家长主义能否为强制辩护?
Int J Soc Psychiatry. 2013 May;59(3):217-23. doi: 10.1177/0020764011431543. Epub 2012 Jan 4.
6
Can we justify eliminating coercive measures in psychiatry?我们能否证明在精神病学中消除强制手段是合理的?
J Med Ethics. 2009 Jan;35(1):69-73. doi: 10.1136/jme.2007.022780.
7
Pressure and coercion in the care for the addicted: ethical perspectives.对成瘾者护理中的压力与强制:伦理视角
J Med Ethics. 2004 Oct;30(5):453-8. doi: 10.1136/jme.2002.002212.
8
Non-consensual treatment is (nearly always) morally impermissible.非自愿治疗(几乎总是)在道德上是不允许的。
J Law Med Ethics. 2010 Winter;38(4):789-98. doi: 10.1111/j.1748-720X.2010.00532.x.
9
Involuntary psychiatric interventions: a breach of the Hippocratic oath?非自愿精神科干预:违背希波克拉底誓言?
Ethical Hum Sci Serv. 2000 Spring;2(1):21-41.
10
In the name of treatment: autonomy, civil commitment, and right to refuse treatment.以治疗之名:自主权、民事强制住院及拒绝治疗权。
Notre Dame Lawyer. 1975 Jun;50(5):808-42.

引用本文的文献

1
Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the staff attitude to coercion scale: an exploratory factor analysis.意大利版工作人员对强制态度量表的心理测量特性:探索性因素分析
Front Psychiatry. 2023 May 24;14:1172803. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2023.1172803. eCollection 2023.
2
Persuasion or coercion? An empirical ethics analysis about the use of influence strategies in mental health community care.劝导还是强迫?关于在精神卫生社区护理中使用影响策略的实证伦理分析。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Oct 21;22(1):1273. doi: 10.1186/s12913-022-08555-5.
3
Coercive Measures in Psychiatry: A Review of Ethical Arguments.
精神病学中的强制手段:伦理观点综述
Front Psychiatry. 2021 Dec 14;12:790886. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2021.790886. eCollection 2021.
4
Mandatory treatment for methamphetamine use in Australia.在澳大利亚,对甲基苯丙胺使用进行强制治疗。
Subst Abuse Treat Prev Policy. 2021 Apr 9;16(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s13011-021-00370-1.
5
Factors Associated With Involuntary Psychiatric Hospitalization of Youths in China Based on a Nationally Representative Sample.基于全国代表性样本的中国青少年非自愿精神病住院相关因素
Front Psychiatry. 2020 Dec 3;11:607464. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.607464. eCollection 2020.
6
Covert medication and patient identity: placing the ethical analysis in a worldwide context.秘密用药与患者身份:将伦理分析置于全球背景下
J Med Ethics. 2020 Dec 17;47(12):e59. doi: 10.1136/medethics-2020-106695.
7
Clinical Relevance of Informal Coercion in Psychiatric Treatment-A Systematic Review.精神科治疗中非正式强制手段的临床相关性——一项系统综述
Front Psychiatry. 2016 Dec 12;7:197. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00197. eCollection 2016.
8
Patient autonomy and choice in healthcare: self-testing devices as a case in point.医疗保健中的患者自主权与选择:以自我检测设备为例。
Med Health Care Philos. 2012 Nov;15(4):383-95. doi: 10.1007/s11019-011-9356-6.
9
Coercion and pressure in psychiatry: lessons from Ulysses.精神病学中的强制与压力:来自尤利西斯的教训。
J Med Ethics. 2007 Oct;33(10):560-3. doi: 10.1136/jme.2005.015545.