Suppr超能文献

心理健康的进展与展望:精神病学正遭受污名化吗?

Advances and perspectives in mental health: is psychiatry being stigmatized?

作者信息

Montenegro R

机构信息

Corporate Secretary of the World Federation for Mental Health, Former President of the Latin American Psychiatric Association, Former President of the Association of Argentinean Psychiatrists.

出版信息

Psychiatriki. 2011 Oct-Dec;22(4):283-9.

Abstract

The specialty of Psychiatry and the interdisciplinary work performed by psychiatrists in conjunction with other scientific and humanistic disciplines is being affected by some facts which lead to its stigmatization. There are both internal and external risks that are affecting the profession. Among the internal ones we may mention the different diagnostic criteria used by psychiatrists and the differences between treatments--as there is a wide variety of treatment options. Besides, the practice of psychiatry may differ enormously, according to the perspective--biological, psychological, social, cultural, and so on--of each psychiatrist. The internal inconsistencies give rise to some of the external risks psychiatry and psychiatrists have to face: patients' discontent or even mistrust, the intrusion of other professions in the field of psychiatry and the negative image psychiatry has among the public. Just as it occurred in many other places before, the passing of a new mental health law in Argentina has proved to be an occasion for deep debate. The passing of this law has caused big controversy, especially among professional associations, private mental health services, NGOs which represent users and their families, trade unions which represent health workers, political and economic decision makers, etc. In Argentina, the debate of ideas has always been rich. Even when political parties were forbidden, there were discussions taking place among groups which supported psychoanalytic and psychodynamic approaches. There are many who demonize the developments made in the field of psychiatry and they also campaign against such developments. They catch the public's attention and they convince legislators, thus spreading the idea that psychiatry may be dangerous. As a consequence, for example, the new law gives similar status to psychiatrists and psychologists when it states that the decision to confine a patient into hospital "should be signed by two professionals, one of whom should be either a psychologist or a psychiatrist". We all know that psychologists play a very important role in mental health care, but the medical training of psychiatrists will surely enable them to make very complex medical decisions such as the decision to confine a patient into hospital. Some other aspects to be mentioned about this law are that no reference is made to outpatient services, although they are of utmost importance in everyday practice, and that there is a bureaucratization of hospitalization. Such decision is no longer made by a professional, as a means to achieve the best treatment possible, but by a judge, who is expected to know what is best for the patient. However, there are basic contents in this law which are definitely positive: it defends patients' rights; it promotes interdisciplinary team work; it recommends deinstitutionalization, community services and, if necessary, inpatient services in general hospitals. However, there are many doubts as regards the way this will be put into practice. In most countries psychiatry is also threatened by a shortage of psychiatrists. In Argentina, the number of medical students who choose this branch of medicine as their specialty has declined the past twenty years, while the number of prospective psychologists has soared in the meantime. These are some of the reasons why many believe that psychiatry is being discredited. In this scenario, where there are both internal and external risks for psychiatry, our main professional interest is based on improving our patients' quality of life, which obviously includes their mental health. In order to achieve the best results we should avoid militant attitudes and the ideologization of reality, and be as creative as possible looking for the best way to do so.

摘要

精神病学专业以及精神科医生与其他科学和人文学科共同开展的跨学科工作正受到一些导致其被污名化的因素影响。存在一些正在影响该职业的内部和外部风险。在内部风险中,我们可以提及精神科医生使用的不同诊断标准以及治疗方法之间的差异——因为存在各种各样的治疗选择。此外,根据每位精神科医生的生物学、心理学、社会、文化等视角,精神病学的实践可能差异极大。内部的不一致引发了精神科和精神科医生必须面对的一些外部风险:患者的不满甚至不信任、其他专业对精神病学领域的侵入以及精神病学在公众中的负面形象。正如之前在许多其他地方发生的那样,阿根廷新精神卫生法的通过已成为引发深入辩论的契机。该法律的通过引发了巨大争议,尤其是在专业协会、私立精神卫生服务机构、代表用户及其家庭的非政府组织、代表卫生工作者的工会、政治和经济决策者等之间。在阿根廷,思想辩论一直很丰富。即使政党被禁止,支持精神分析和心理动力学方法的团体之间也在进行讨论。有许多人妖魔化精神病学领域的发展,他们还发起反对这些发展的运动。他们吸引了公众的关注并说服了立法者,从而传播了精神病学可能危险的观念。例如,结果是新法律在规定将患者送进医院的决定“应由两名专业人员签署,其中一名应为心理学家或精神科医生”时,赋予了精神科医生和心理学家类似的地位。我们都知道心理学家在精神卫生保健中发挥着非常重要的作用,但精神科医生的医学培训肯定使他们能够做出非常复杂的医疗决定,比如将患者送进医院的决定。关于这项法律还应提及的其他一些方面是,尽管门诊服务在日常实践中至关重要,但法律未提及门诊服务,并且存在住院治疗的官僚化现象。这样的决定不再由专业人员做出,以寻求可能的最佳治疗,而是由一名法官做出,人们期望法官知道什么对患者最有利。然而,这项法律中有一些基本内容肯定是积极的:它捍卫患者权利;它促进跨学科团队合作;它建议去机构化、社区服务以及必要时在综合医院提供住院服务。然而,对于其将如何付诸实践存在许多疑问。在大多数国家,精神病学也受到精神科医生短缺的威胁。在阿根廷,过去二十年来选择将这一医学分支作为其专业的医学生数量有所下降,而与此同时,未来可能成为心理学家的人数却大幅上升。这些就是许多人认为精神病学正声誉受损的一些原因。在这种精神病学面临内部和外部风险的情况下,我们主要关心的专业问题是提高我们患者的生活质量,这显然包括他们的心理健康。为了取得最佳效果,我们应避免激进态度和对现实进行意识形态化,并且尽可能富有创造性地寻找实现这一目标的最佳途径。

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