Koike Junko, Morita Nobuaki, Harima Hirohiko, Nakatani Yoji
Graduate School of Comprehensive Human Sciences, University of Tsukuba.
Seishin Shinkeigaku Zasshi. 2009;111(11):1345-62.
A survey was conducted involving 664 individuals admitted to a public psychiatric hospital in Tokyo Prefecture between July 15, 2004 and July 14, 2007 as a result of involuntary admission by order of the prefectural governor (hereafter, involuntarily admitted patients). The characteristics of patients with a focus on the effects of the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act were investigated in 656 patients, excluding eight patients for whom information at the time of involuntary admission was unclear. The proportion of patients in the present survey who had been reported by prosecutors was markedly low compared to nationwide and previous surveys. This was thought to be a result of the fact that the proportion of patients reported by the police, which tend to include emergency cases, was high due to the characteristics of the present hospital as well as the regional characteristics of Tokyo Prefecture. The characteristics of involuntarily admitted patients tended to be similar to those observed in previous surveys on involuntarily admitted patients at the present and other hospitals in Tokyo Prefecture. Comparison of the characteristics of involuntarily admitted patients and problem behaviors that instigated admission before and after implementation of the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act showed no clear differences, indicating that the act had no marked effect on involuntary admission by order of the prefectural governor. In addition, only a small proportion of patients with problem behaviors corresponding to actions described in the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act were reported by prosecutors, suggesting that such patients were mostly reported by the police. In cases where patients faced involuntary admission by order of the prefectural governor after being reported by the police, the prosecutor may have either been unaware of the patient or, if aware, had not filed a petition. Issues may include clues for investigation in addition to the roles of judicial police officers and prosecutors in investigation procedures in the former case, and the discretion of prosecutors in the latter case. While opinions on the appropriateness of actively applying the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act to these patients vary depending on the interpretation of the act's legal characteristics, it appeared that involuntary admission by order of the prefectural governor was at present not clearly distinguished from the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act. Involuntary admission by order of the prefectural governor and the Medical Treatment and Supervision Act are systems that have significant implications for patients with mental disorders, who are likely to cause injury to themselves or others. In order to facilitate the provision of appropriate medical care, it is important to clarify the systematic relationships within the legal system.
对2004年7月15日至2007年7月14日期间因东京都知事下令非自愿入院而入住东京都一家公立精神病院的664人进行了一项调查(以下简称非自愿入院患者)。在656名患者中调查了以《医疗与监管法》影响为重点的患者特征,排除了8名非自愿入院时信息不明的患者。与全国范围和以往调查相比,本次调查中被检察官报告的患者比例明显较低。这被认为是由于本院的特点以及东京都的地区特点,倾向于包括紧急情况的警方报告患者比例较高的结果。非自愿入院患者的特征往往与东京都目前及其他医院以往对非自愿入院患者的调查中观察到的特征相似。比较《医疗与监管法》实施前后非自愿入院患者的特征以及导致入院的问题行为,没有发现明显差异,这表明该法对知事下令的非自愿入院没有显著影响。此外,检察官报告的对应《医疗与监管法》所述行为的有问题行为患者比例很小,这表明这类患者大多是被警方报告的。在患者被警方报告后因知事下令而面临非自愿入院的情况下,检察官可能要么不知道该患者,要么即使知道也没有提出申请。在前一种情况下,问题可能包括调查线索以及司法警官和检察官在调查程序中的作用,在后一种情况下则是检察官的自由裁量权。虽然根据对该法法律特征的解释,对于是否积极将《医疗与监管法》适用于这些患者的适当性存在不同意见,但目前知事下令的非自愿入院与《医疗与监管法》之间似乎没有明确区分。知事下令的非自愿入院和《医疗与监管法》是对可能对自己或他人造成伤害的精神障碍患者具有重大影响的制度。为了便于提供适当的医疗护理,明确法律制度内的系统关系很重要。