Sauvayre P
Kirby Forensic Psychiatric Center, New York, NY.
J Forensic Sci. 1991 Jan;36(1):219-25.
New procedures, tailored after such court decisions as Rogers v. Commissioner of the Department of Mental Health, have restricted the doctor's ability to treat psychiatric inpatients with psychotropic medication and have increased the protection of a competent patient's right to refuse. This study investigates how the relationship between the doctor and the court has adapted to these new procedures. All 40 court cases of a maximum security forensic hospital over a two-year period were reviewed. Results suggest that the new procedures have had no dramatic effect upon either the treatment patients receive or the doctor-court relationship. While abstract arguments both in favor of and against these new procedures can be drawn from the same data, the concrete relationship still remains poorly understood.
新程序是根据诸如罗杰斯诉心理健康部专员等法院判决制定的，这些程序限制了医生使用精神药物治疗精神病住院患者的能力，并加强了对有行为能力患者拒绝治疗权利的保护。本研究调查了医生与法院之间的关系是如何适应这些新程序的。对一所最高安全级别的法医医院在两年期间的40起法庭案件进行了审查。结果表明，新程序对患者接受的治疗或医生与法院的关系均未产生显著影响。虽然支持和反对这些新程序的抽象论点都可以从相同的数据中得出，但具体关系仍未得到充分理解。
